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 claims that birth-order plays a significant role in an individual’s level of stimulation supported by experiments carried out on 18 rhesus monkeys. Apparently, first-borns showed a higher production of cortisol hormone than their younger-siblings when put into stimulating situations.
However, the argument lies unjustified because of a sundry of loopholes that lay unexplored.
Firstly, the experiment only takes into account stimulating situations. Surely there would be a different outcome if the monkeys were placed in a quotidian schedule. The argument would also be more veritable if it considered hormone levels of first-born monkeys and the younger-born monkeys and cast them into variety of tests that indite of critical situations, normal routines and exciting encounters.
Second, the author tries to imply that first-born human offspring, showed similar increase in cortisol hormone as well- thereby indirectly tries to validate his conclusion. Because the author fails to consider the hormone levels of second-born and third-born human offspring, this observation might as well be futile. This argument can be strengthened if the author also noted the cortisol-levels in the younger-offspring. And although the author does try to fit changes in human anatomy in rhesus monkeys, one has to go only a little far to disprove the correlation because the human-beings are an evolved and highly-capable race and higher level of stimulation of environment was a necessity—something that is not requisite to rhesus monkeys.
Lastly, to conclude the argument and strengthen it furthermore, the author tries to increase the argument’s credibility by associating the fact of increased cortisol hormone-levels in first-time mothers as compared to those that have given multiple births. If cortisol hormone is proportional to levels of stimulation in an individual, the cortisol-levels in the mother would mean negligible to the cortisol-levels in the first born since those first-born, if placed in a highly stimulating environment would have higher cortisol levels and vice versa. Regardless, the high cortisol-levels during first-time pregnancy can be a result of experiencing child-bearing for the first time. Also, this contributes nothing to the argument as those mothers that have given birth multiple times have also have had their peak cortisol-levels during their first-pregnancy.
Conclusively, for above reasons, the argument lies unjustified and full of flaws. Author may provide credible evidence as to why necessary studies were carried out incompletely.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 800, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'had'.
Suggestion: had
...ve given birth multiple times have also have had their peak cortisol-levels during t...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'apparently', 'but', 'first', 'firstly', 'furthermore', 'however', 'if', 'lastly', 'may', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'third', 'well', 'as to']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.248226950355 0.25644967241 97% => OK
Verbs: 0.144208037825 0.15541462614 93% => OK
Adjectives: 0.113475177305 0.0836205057962 136% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0520094562648 0.0520304965353 100% => OK
Pronouns: 0.016548463357 0.0272364105082 61% => OK
Prepositions: 0.127659574468 0.125424944231 102% => OK
Participles: 0.0330969267139 0.0416121511921 80% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.56178262895 2.79052419416 128% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0330969267139 0.026700313972 124% => OK
Particles: 0.00236406619385 0.001811407834 131% => OK
Determiners: 0.108747044917 0.113004496875 96% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0189125295508 0.0255425247493 74% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0141843971631 0.0127820249294 111% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2598.0 2731.13054187 95% => OK
No of words: 383.0 446.07635468 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.78328981723 6.12365571057 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.57801047555 97% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.446475195822 0.378187486979 118% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.360313315927 0.287650121315 125% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.281984334204 0.208842608468 135% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.195822454308 0.135150697306 145% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.56178262895 2.79052419416 128% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 207.018472906 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.519582245431 0.469332199767 111% => OK
Word variations: 56.9584502184 52.1807786196 109% => OK
How many sentences: 16.0 20.039408867 80% => OK
Sentence length: 23.9375 23.2022227129 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.3690668727 57.7814097925 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 162.375 141.986410481 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9375 23.2022227129 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.0 0.724660767414 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 59.9688315927 51.9672348444 115% => OK
Elegance: 1.92222222222 1.8405768891 104% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.479009611734 0.441005458295 109% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.131809792375 0.135418324435 97% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.111637654277 0.0829849096947 135% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.6332564112 0.58762219726 108% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.152381346917 0.147661913831 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.203054650339 0.193483328276 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0892483456511 0.0970749176394 92% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.273949981653 0.42659136922 64% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.13995809659 0.0774707102158 181% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.294434389562 0.312017818177 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0648302439344 0.0698173142475 93% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.33743842365 120% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.87684729064 58% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.82512315271 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 9.0 6.46551724138 139% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 5.36822660099 75% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 14.657635468 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.