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.
In the letter, it is stated that, the writer has proposed a correlation between the birth order and individual’s level of stimulation. He has showed a few reasons based on which he has made the correlation. Before accepting his result, it is needed to know whether these reasons are flawless.
First of all, the prompt suggests that the recent study of eighteen monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual’s level of stimulation. Is a number, 18, statistically significant in conducting a scientific research? Moreover, how has this sample even been collected? Has it been followed how the statisticians recommend? The study might find a different result if the authority has collected more monkeys and in a statistically sound distribution. If it is true, the argument is weakened.
Second, the prompt suggests that Cortisol is the prime factor in increasing activity levels. Perhaps, it might not be the case. It is possible that Cortisol might be one of the factors, which increase the activity levels in the monkeys. Whether it alone is responsible to increase the activity level has not been proved. Hence, if the above discussion has merit, the argument will not hold water.
Finally, can we extrapolate the results obtained in a monkey’s body to a human’s body? A human is different from a monkey in many respects, both physically, and in functioning. Maybe what is true for a monkey is not true for a human. What results found due to Cortisol in a monkey’s body might be different form that resulted due to Cortisol in a human’s body. If this is not false, the argument will be found with many cracks.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is flawed due to reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the above questions are answered, and the author proposes more evidence, then it will be possible to evaluate viability of extrapolating the results derived from these monkeys to the humans.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 257, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cepting his result, it is needed to know whether these reasons are flawless. Fir...
^^
Line 2, column 222, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'scientific research'.
Suggestion: scientific research
...statistically significant in conducting a scientific research? Moreover, how has this sample even bee...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 237, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whether” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ase the activity levels in the monkeys. Whether it alone is responsible to increase the...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, hence, if, may, moreover, second, so, then, as to, in conclusion, first of all, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 55.5748502994 67% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1634.0 2260.96107784 72% => OK
No of words: 327.0 441.139720559 74% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99694189602 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99879179005 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 204.123752495 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.495412844037 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 506.7 705.55239521 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.6886408008 57.8364921388 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 77.8095238095 119.503703932 65% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.5714285714 23.324526521 67% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.28571428571 5.70786347227 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.174331664579 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.04661323663 0.0743258471296 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0921944110124 0.0701772020484 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0922448663707 0.128457276422 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0967036542067 0.0628817314937 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 14.3799401198 69% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 48.3550499002 134% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 12.197005988 66% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.42 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.