"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 presenting the fact about effect of birth order on the level of cortisol hormone production and proposing it as only explanation. However, the argument writer is missing others possible explanations those can outstrip his own.
First of all, this study involved only eighteen rhesus monkeys which is hardly regarded as representing sample. The argument doesn’t mention any method in which the experiment has been carried out. Additionally, there is no description that how did they identified those monkey as first born. Pedigree and parent history are also required to be confirmed about the result. It may happen that the study worked in random and had exaggerated about the findings.
Let’s assume that they carried out the study in statistical sound way even then they had to examine any other alternative stimulation apart from an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey which actually resulted in increased amount of cortisol production in first born. Perhaps if they took account others alternative stimulator might find different result. Others kind of stimulators may elicit equal amount cortisol production in every sibling. If this might true, then the fact presented in the argument would fall apart.
The study mentioned only first time mother monkey and didn’t say about anything about second and later time. Weather they produce higher or lower amount of cortisol at later is not clear. During pregnancy, a would be mother undergoes several physiological changes and hormone production varies with individual physiology. Perhaps birth order is not only effector here and cortisol is not the only result. Study should have also found other physical properties that can effect this type of result.
Author also compare this study subject with human perhaps for gaining more plausibility. Though monkeys are chronologically near to human but their physiology and stimulator type differs a lot.
Finally, if these alternative explanations proved right then the explanation about fact presented in the argument will get any ground hardly. The team should widen their research methodology and take other possible effectors in account for sustainability of their findings.
- Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances times and places 58
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers 50
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition 58
- According to a recent report by our marketing department during the past year fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies than in any other year And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actual 50
- Some people believe that scientific discoveries have given us a much better understanding of the world around us Others believe that science has revealed to us that the world is infinitely more complex than we ever realized 83
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.0 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 342 350
No. of Characters: 1817 1500
No. of Different Words: 193 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.3 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.313 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.687 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 135 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 96 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 70 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.1 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.347 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.292 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.292 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.039 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 213, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this can' or 'those cans'?
Suggestion: this can; those cans
...is missing others possible explanations those can outstrip his own. First of all, this s...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 135, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[3]
Message: The adverb 'hardly' is usually not used at the end of a sentence.
...ted in the argument will get any ground hardly. The team should widen their research m...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, so, then, apart from, kind of, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1863.0 2260.96107784 82% => OK
No of words: 340.0 441.139720559 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47941176471 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29407602571 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72674026206 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 204.123752495 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.561764705882 0.468620217663 120% => OK
syllable_count: 576.9 705.55239521 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.7857332112 57.8364921388 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.15 119.503703932 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 23.324526521 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.3 5.70786347227 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.221690015848 0.218282227539 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.058809298928 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0635948731937 0.0701772020484 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105269695407 0.128457276422 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0602055031635 0.0628817314937 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.52 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => 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.