"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 author of the editor of a scientific journal provides an argument that, analysis the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation by conducting a study on eighteen rhesus monkeys. Though his claims well have merits, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
The primary issue with the author’s reasoning lie in his unsubstantiated premises. The author claims to conducted the study on eighteen rhesus monkeys, but he didn’t explain the extend to which, rhesus monkeys are related to human being. The author’s premises, the basis for his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and renders his conclusion unacceptable.
In addition, the author weakens his argument by making assumptions and falling to provide explanation of link between the simulating situation in an infant monkeys and firstborn humans. The former one suggests, when a firstborn infant monkey see an ‘unfamiliar’ face, an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey, will trend to produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol. And the latter one suggests, when a firstborn human see ‘familiar’ face after a long time, the return of a parent after an absence, will trend to produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations. The two examples are contradictory to each other and stating different situation.
While the author does have several key issues in his argument’s premises and assumptions, that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. As at the end of the argument, author do propose a study which states that, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring, which seems to strength his premises. Though there are several issues with which the author’s reasoning at present, with research and clarification, could be improved significantly.
In sum, the author’s irrational argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that weakens his claim that birth order have effects on an individual's levels of stimulation. If the author truly hopes to change his readers’ mind on the issue, he would have to 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 185, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...sus monkeys, but he didn't explain the extend to which, rhesus monkeys are related to...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 249, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...sus monkeys are related to human being. The author's premises, the basis for h...
^^^
Line 7, column 308, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: had
...r levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring, which seems to stren...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, so, well, while, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 19.6327345309 41% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2159.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 391.0 441.139720559 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.52173913043 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44676510885 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25301596756 2.78398813304 117% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 204.123752495 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514066496164 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 665.1 705.55239521 94% => 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
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.2519872465 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.933333333 119.503703932 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0666666667 23.324526521 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.93333333333 5.70786347227 51% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.331827868241 0.218282227539 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.128794378493 0.0743258471296 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.129297821181 0.0701772020484 184% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192414844481 0.128457276422 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101378778498 0.0628817314937 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 14.3799401198 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.3550499002 76% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.5979740519 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.32208582834 110% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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: 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.