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 close monitoring of the biochemical responses of many animal species to gain insight into the behavioral patterns has gained a lot of traction and popularity in the recent years. While many studies provide fresh evidence that debunks the commonly accepted theories being followed in the scientific community, quite a few studies tend to overestimate their results and hence fail to provide incorrigible conclusions. In the preceding statement, the author claims that the birth order among Rhesus monkeys influences the magnitude of response towards stimulation. The author then extrapolates the conclusions made on Rhesus monkeys to Human beings. While this study may well have some merit, the author constructs a poorly reasoned argument, based on several small scale observations and many glaring yet feeble assumptions.
Primarily, the author has conducted behavioral experiments with Rhesus Monkeys which are a specific species of the Monkey family. It is a well-known fact that different species of the same family of animals exhibit extremely dissimilar characteristics and behaviors. The observations made while providing stimulus to a Rhesus monkey cannot be extrapolated to the complete Monkey family and yet, the author has provided a juxtaposition with the behavior of Human Beings. Second, the author has provided data for infant species of the Rhesus Monkeys. It is an established notion that the brain develops actively from infancy till maturity. Drawing conclusions of such high importance taking the volatile infant brain into consideration could lead to completely unreliable results. The author's selection of species and method of study casts some doubts on the conclusions proposed.
In addition, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. Firstly, the use of Cortisol hormone levels to measure the response to a stimulus is based on the assumption that Cortisol is the only hormone that is responsible for priming the body when activity levels increase. There may be multiple hormones that get secreted in our body based on the type of stimulus provided. Second, the author compares the Cortisol levels amongst siblings. This implies that cortisol levels for different age groups are compared collectively. The author assumes that the levels of hormonal secretion remain the same irrespective of the age and development of the species. The author weakens his argument by making atrocious assumptions that cannot be proven to exist.
While the author's premise and conclusion may not be infallible, that is not to say that the entire argument is without a base. The author can further strengthen his argument by providing a more diverse data set. A comparison of the response of multiple species of Monkeys to a stimulus can be cross-referenced with the age of monkeys. A deeper study into mother monkeys can provide evidence into whether cortisol levels in the infant monkeys depend on the hereditary levels of the mothers.
Summing up, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. A thorough study regarding stimulus responses among species needs to be carried out in a more analytical fashion. If the author truly hopes to change his readers' minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions, and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will likely convince few people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 784, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...d to completely unreliable results. The authors selection of species and method of stud...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 11, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...cannot be proven to exist. While the authors premise and conclusion may not be infal...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['first', 'firstly', 'hence', 'if', 'may', 'regarding', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'well', 'while', 'in addition']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.297297297297 0.25644967241 116% => OK
Verbs: 0.152027027027 0.15541462614 98% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0912162162162 0.0836205057962 109% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0422297297297 0.0520304965353 81% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0219594594595 0.0272364105082 81% => OK
Prepositions: 0.114864864865 0.125424944231 92% => OK
Participles: 0.0489864864865 0.0416121511921 118% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.91288030319 2.79052419416 104% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0253378378378 0.026700313972 95% => OK
Particles: 0.00337837837838 0.001811407834 187% => OK
Determiners: 0.125 0.113004496875 111% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0185810810811 0.0255425247493 73% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0152027027027 0.0127820249294 119% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3532.0 2731.13054187 129% => OK
No of words: 546.0 446.07635468 122% => OK
Chars per words: 6.46886446886 6.12365571057 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83390555256 4.57801047555 106% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.470695970696 0.378187486979 124% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.357142857143 0.287650121315 124% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.249084249084 0.208842608468 119% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.14652014652 0.135150697306 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91288030319 2.79052419416 104% => OK
Unique words: 266.0 207.018472906 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.487179487179 0.469332199767 104% => OK
Word variations: 58.3327230692 52.1807786196 112% => OK
How many sentences: 27.0 20.039408867 135% => OK
Sentence length: 20.2222222222 23.2022227129 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.2472990787 57.7814097925 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.814814815 141.986410481 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2222222222 23.2022227129 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.444444444444 0.724660767414 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 55.9365079365 51.9672348444 108% => OK
Elegance: 2.1328125 1.8405768891 116% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.516081534194 0.441005458295 117% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0967480118665 0.135418324435 71% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0660462265852 0.0829849096947 80% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.531945545705 0.58762219726 91% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.137254487698 0.147661913831 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.207096701895 0.193483328276 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.124485270683 0.0970749176394 128% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.500260549285 0.42659136922 117% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.113217666594 0.0774707102158 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.375836080226 0.312017818177 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.110618369137 0.0698173142475 158% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.33743842365 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.87684729064 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 14.0 4.82512315271 290% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 4.0 6.46551724138 62% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 12.0 2.82389162562 425% => Less neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 23.0 14.657635468 157% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
More arguments wanted.
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.