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 brings information of a study on eighteen rhesus monkeys to claim that the levels of stimulation that depends on the cortisol hormone variates between first born child and his/her siblings. To prove this fact, the author misleadingly considers the results of study on monkeys to hold true for human being, too. There exist several alternative explanations which are neglected by the author that makes the argument unreliable.
The first challenging issue about the argument is that the argument is comparing a specific behavior in human and monkeys. The author claims without warrant that what held true about the monkeys will hold true about human being. Although there exist multiple researches on the evolution pattern and similarity of human and monkeys, relying on the result of a behavioral study on monkey may be a fallacious assumption for human. Furthermore, the compared stimulating situations are disparate and incomparable. While monkeys’ level of cortisol hormone increases by visiting an unfamiliar monkey, human experience rise of hormone by returning of a parent after an absence. It is apparently evident that the example for the human is an emotional situation that can affect both physical and mental reactions of a person. However, the monkey’s instinct may cause this reaction because of feeling danger that is common among numerous types of animals.
Also, the author fails to consider the alternative explanation of parent’s behavior in this argument. Perhaps, the way of treating the first child contributes to this level of produced cortisol in stimulating situations. It is possible that since the first child receives more attention than next siblings, his self-esteem differs from other children that causes different reactions in stimulating situations. In other words, the author should provide concrete evidence that the level of produced cortisol hormone hinges upon the physical factors of order of birth not mental state of the child.
Finally, the argument leaves many ambiguities regarding the pregnancy period of the monkeys. The argument would have been stronger had it provided information about alternative possibilities of producing cortisol. Does the mother monkey have lower levels of cortisol in her next birth giving? What are the contributing factors of producing cortisol? How many mother monkeys with several offspring have been compared to the first-time mother monkeys? Even then, the argument would have further proved that those eighteen rhesus monkeys in the study bear a close resemblance to a pregnant human in features of pregnancy and function of hormones.
To conclude, the argument evaluates the fact of higher levels of cortisol hormone of firstborn infant with results of a study on monkeys. Unexamined suppositions led to fallacious conclusion that both the first-mother monkey and human have higher levels of cortisol to transfer to their first child. If the author seeks to reach at a conclusion that the argument is reliable, he should elucidate the ambiguities and consider alternative explanations. Otherwise, the argument is untenable.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-23 | lanhhoang | 29 | view |
| 2019-09-24 | jms96ZZ | 80 | view |
| 2019-05-31 | Haley.J | 29 | view |
| 2019-04-30 | luckystar1941 | 29 | view |
| 2018-12-28 | Saravananramesh | 26 | view |
- The council of Maple County, concerned about the county’s becoming overdeveloped, is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limitin 69
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be 66
- There is now evidence that the relaxed pace of life in small towns promotes better health and greater longevity than does the hectic pace of life in big cities. Businesses in the small town of Leeville report fewer days of sick leave taken by individual w 59
- The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals. “In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps, a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful b 49
- In any field – business, politics, education, government – those in power should be required to step down after five years. Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In develop 83
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-2-outline
----------------------------
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: 24 15
No. of Words: 483 350
No. of Characters: 2590 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.688 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.362 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.777 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 206 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 166 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 126 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.125 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.574 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.317 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.508 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, regarding, so, then, while, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 55.5748502994 133% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2654.0 2260.96107784 117% => OK
No of words: 482.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.50622406639 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68556276237 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89743345177 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483402489627 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 823.5 705.55239521 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.0753773539 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.583333333 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0833333333 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 5.70786347227 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.17127537299 0.218282227539 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0508351750444 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.045311187391 0.0701772020484 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105118866467 0.128457276422 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0276090860312 0.0628817314937 44% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 135.0 98.500998004 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.