Argument53,求拍来了

Jamin_CheungUID: 2752925

第一次限时写的，不过自己已经修改了一下的。

ARGUMENT53 - Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin-a hormone known to affect some brain functions-would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children-now teenagers-who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.


Is the increased levels of melatonin before birth the antecedent of shyness during infancy and this shyness continue into later life? The author tries to confirm the readers in his claim by providing a seemingly authoritative study of a group of 25 infants. However, close scructiny of these evidencs reveals that it lends little credible support for the author's assertion.
One of the author's problem is his failure to inform us of more details about the infants who the researchers observed, such as their and their mothers' health quality, their mothers' living condition and characters. It's likely that a less healthy or less cared infant will be more sensitive to unfamiliar stimuli, for they feel more unsafe and afraid of the outside world. What's more, the author mistakes the signs of mild distress with shyness on purpose. There's no scientific evidence showing that the mild distress is a sign of shyness. There can also exist another explanation that it means that the infants feel upset when they are exposed to unfamiliar stimuli. If these possiblity were not excluded, I won't trust the author's claim.
Even I concede that the melatonin will have something to do with the shyness of infants, here lacks the relevant scientific study again. The author ambiguously definites that melatonin is a hormone known to affect some brain functions. Yet what do the brain functions accurately refer to? Does melatonin really play such a main role in the feeling of shyness of people since they were infants? Consequently, the effect of melatonin on infants' shyness remains mysterious. On the other hand, I have to cast my doubts on the allergation that the infants studied were more likely to have been conceived in early autumn. Is it just a coincidence? Now that the sample of this survey is not large enough in number, it's unfair of the author to come to the conclusion of this. Thus, these questions make us bogged with the doubts.
Finally, consider the follow-up study of the children who used to be the 25 infants conducted earlier this year. The author unsubstantially assumes that the melatonin is the only or most important factor in one's growth. As we all know, one's character is influced by both congentital factors say the genes from parents and the acuqired experience like their grow-up environment. Obviously, a lonely boy who has little touch with the outside world will be more probable to be identified as shy than a sociable one who will smile to every one on the road regardless of friends or stranges. In addition, it's hard to evaluate the levels of shyness by their own feeling. Some people identifiny themshelve as shyness can due to their lack of confidence instead of the truth. In this way, the support of the follow-up study is unconvincing as well.
In sum, the author's support to his conclusion is not valid enough. To bolster, he must show me further research into the signs of mild distress of the infants and the fuction of melatonin. Besides, I expect to know more details about the people who have been studied, especially their growth experience.