The above argument compares a fact that seem to be related in rhesus monkeys and humans. It claims that first born of the Rhesus monkey mother shows high levels of hormone cortisol when it is stimulated such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey. It also further claims that first-born humans also produce a higher level of cortisol when their parents return after an absence. The mentioned argument seemed to quite ambiguous and it is filled with factual errors which are discussed in the alternative explanations which could plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
To begin with, the argument seems to compare two different animal species the Rhesus monkey and Humans which is totally wrong. It might happen that the hormone cortisol may be generated due to some different reason in humans than the monkey. You cannot compare two species having being separated in their evolution tree millions of years ago with same symptoms. The comparison seems to be factually incorrect and its quite evident that it’s trying arduously to justify the conclusion.
Furthermore, one could argue the term relatively high in the argument when comparing the cortisol hormone levels of firstborn and other. It might happen that relatively high might be a very slight difference and not too great of a difference for substantiating the conclusion. It may be well within the margin of error. The argument fails to state any kind of statistical evidence regarding the amount by which the levels were high. Consider for an example if the India and Australia are having a cricket match and India won by relatively high margin that doesn’t seem to justify that Australia is a bad team.
Moreover, the argument mentions that it has conducted the study on eighteen rhesus monkey which is very less for conclusively deriving such inference. Also, it fails to mention the number of humans studied for their experiments. It might happen that all the monkeys studied were from the same group and all produced higher level of cortisol without any kind of stimulation. This kind of study requires years of observation and statistics to prove the hypothesis but the argument fails to deliver such.
Hence, unequivocally we can say that by taking into account such crucial explanations the argument fails to justify the conclusion. It is impossible that such a study with a very little amount of population to study will lead to conclusions mentioned in the argument. To put it simply it fails to justify the conclusion on the basis of the provided evidence.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 424 350
No. of Characters: 2097 1500
No. of Different Words: 199 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.538 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.946 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.621 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 155 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 110 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.2 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.519 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.65 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.309 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.309 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.074 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 84, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'monkey' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'monkeys'.
Suggestion: monkeys
... conducted the study on eighteen rhesus monkey which is very less for conclusively der...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, furthermore, hence, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, well, kind of, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2143.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 423.0 441.139720559 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06619385343 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53508145475 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70243478458 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 204.123752495 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.475177304965 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 667.8 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.2371962562 57.8364921388 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.15 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.15 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.95 5.70786347227 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.26391748072 0.218282227539 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.080765906961 0.0743258471296 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0947400266719 0.0701772020484 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14448816714 0.128457276422 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0745464480876 0.0628817314937 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.