- UID
- 699485
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2011-12-7
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
2. 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.
提纲:1. 实验样本太少,样本的身体状况不知,没有控制变量
2. 即使上述样本有效,hormone cortisol 的分泌水平也可能和年龄有关,实验都是在和年幼的siblings 和生育多胎的mother monkeys 比较。
3. 即使是以上均成立,实验只对monkey和human进行了测试,两者很相似,不能推广到所有的动物个体
字数:427
In the argument above, the author concludes that the birth order could influence an individual’s levels of stimulation. The notion referring to the effects of birth order, based on the study of monkeys and humans, seems at first glance to be an obvious conclusion. However, close scrutiny of the argument, rife with holes of explanation, reveals how groundless the conclusion is.
First and foremost, the author is on the basis of a study of eighteen rhesus monkeys which seems unreliable from the sample size and variable control. First, the sample size is eighteen, which causes great contingency to the experiment result. In order to obtain a more convincing result, the experiment should include more samples to avoid the haphazard. Second, there is no evidence to illustrate the health condition of these monkeys, so we cannot assure that whether the different levels of cortisol arouse by the disparage health condition.
In addition, even though the experiment is credible, the author arrives at the conclusion too hastily. There is no evidence to preclude other explanations to explain the different levels of hormone cortisol, such as the age of the individuals. In these studies, all the tests are conducted between the first born individuals and the younger siblings, or between the first-time mother monkey and the ones who had several offspring. It can rule out that older individuals or first-time mother might produce higher level of cortisol than the younger. So the experiment ought to conduct among individuals of the same age and compare the cortisol level when the younger grow to the same time of life.
Finally, even if all the explanations can be proved to warranted, we cannot expand the effect of birth order on monkeys and humans to all individuals. As we all know, the monkeys and humans are so similar that they may have analogical reaction to the simulating situations, which, of course, could not represent all creatures. Individuals have so many species and to establish an convincing conclusion, we should test different kinds of creatures’ levels of critsol to the simulating situation.
As it stands, though the conclusion about the influence of birth order on an individual’s level stimulation is plausible to be confirmed later, the argument based on insufficient evidence and unwarranted assumptions. To corroborate the argument, the author ought to supply evidence that confirm the sample and data of the experiment is reliable and rule out the effect of age on the result. Moreover, without making an experiment on other creatures, the effect of birth order on all individuals is open to doubt.
|
|