The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal.
"A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased activity levels, as do their younger siblings. Firstborn humans also produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the return of a parent after an absence). The study also found that during pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring."
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
The argument stated is faulty for numerous reasons. Essentially, the evidence offered to argue the main claims of the argument are not as cogent as they appear. The author ignores factors that could also show an increase level of cortisol. Concluding that other elements do not play a role in the perceived increased levels of the cortisol hormone and the sole reason for this increase is due to the factor that these individuals are firstborn is unreasonable.
Firstly, the argument fails to provide evidence to support that high levels of cortisol seen in the stimulated situations in the study is because those monkeys are firstborn. There could be other aspects of their lives that could show this result. For example, the monkeys that were firstborn in the study could have had traumatic experiences with unfamiliar monkeys early on in their lives. If one of these monkeys had engaged in a fight with an unknown monkey which led him to obtaining many life-threatening injuries, then this experience could be the reason why the body of this specific individual is being primed for increased activity and showing increased levels of cortisol. They might be preparing for self-defense and the cortisol increase could be triggered by the past experience. This means the increased hormone level is not because the monkey was the firstborn but instead because of past trauma which would render the results as unreliable. On the other hand, if the monkeys in the study were born in captivity and no trauma was experienced by any, then the argument would deem to be more plausible. In either case, it cannot be surely stated that the reason for the high cortisol levels seen in these monkeys is only because they were born first in a family.
Additionally, the argument neglects to address other issues presented. Imagine all monkeys were born and raised in captivity with no experiences with trauma, it is still baseless to conclude that high cortisol levels perceived in pregnant monkeys were due to the fact they were first-time mothers. So, the author continues to speculate other aspects of one’s life is not impacting the results. For instance, if a mother is overweight and obese, then movement and daily activity could show an incline of cortisol in the body. Because this mother already uses lots of energy for everyday activities and now is using more energy to move around, the body must be primed for increased activity. But now if this same mother loses weight and is no longer obese after her first pregnancy then the other pregnancies would show lower levels of cortisol. If this is the case, then the conclusion is unjust because it did not take into account this extra aspect of one’s lifestyle. However, if the argument shed light on the physical and physiological factors of the mothers, then the argument would hold more validity. But even so, it is difficult to consider all differing factors of every monkey’s life.
As a result of the various unwarranted presumptions made by the argument, the author is unsuccessful in compiling a compelling case to create a correlation between being firstborn and high cortisol levels.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 525 350
No. of Characters: 2574 1500
No. of Different Words: 229 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.787 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.903 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.588 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 188 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 141 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 97 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.864 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.65 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.682 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.307 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.448 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.079 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 778, Rule ID: PAST_EXPERIENCE_MEMORY[1]
Message: Use simply 'experience'.
Suggestion: experience
...isol increase could be triggered by the past experience. This means the increased hormone level...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, so, still, then, even so, for example, for instance, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 36.0 19.6327345309 183% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 55.5748502994 110% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2632.0 2260.96107784 116% => OK
No of words: 525.0 441.139720559 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01333333333 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.78673985869 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66867271484 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.44380952381 0.468620217663 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 833.4 705.55239521 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.1946256794 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.636363636 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8636363636 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.59090909091 5.70786347227 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.88822355289 218% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.12476418738 0.218282227539 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0425749404879 0.0743258471296 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0511632807192 0.0701772020484 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0692245943266 0.128457276422 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0543803305069 0.0628817314937 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 98.500998004 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.