Emulate 小组 Argument53

AK_小儿UID: 2784558

TOPIC: 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.


The author proposed that the increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life for the main reason below: 1 they were more likely to be conceived in early autumn, a time when they got more melatonin from their mother. 2 they are more likely to think themselves shy. I find it really inaccurate to get such a conclusion just for these so-called evidences.

Firstly, what I want to tell is the inaccuracy of the research. The sample size of the research is not large enough. Maybe it's just a coincidence that the 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress were more likely conceived in early autumn. And we didn't know if the infants are healthy enough to react to the stimuli. It should be ensured that they are normal baby without other disease.

Secondly, there is no evidence that the increasing melatonin produced by the mother would be given to the baby. Until we observe the fact that the melatonin was transported from mother to baby, nobody could conclude it is the melatonin that affect the infants. Even if the melatonin was indeed given to the baby, there is no necessary correspondent between the ability of the melatonin to affect the brain function and the signs of mild stress when being stimulated. Author should give some authority research about the function of melatonin.

Thirdly, in the survey of those teenagers, the words “more than half” is not accurate, 51% can also be regarded as more than half. But it is common to see such a number of normal people believe that they themselves are shy. Besides, the children are less able to do an evaluation on themselves than the adults.
Additionally, distress doesn't mean shyness. Author can't regard the signs of mild distress as shyness. It may be just a regular reaction to the stimuli of the environment but not shyness.

Even if the result above is true, we can only admit the influence by melatonin about shyness before birth, we still can't tell it is the melatonin that caused the shyness followed for one's characteristic may shaped by not only hormone but also the environment he lives in.

All in all, the author hold the opinion that the increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life is totally unconvincing when lacking of accurate evidence to demonstrate such problems above. He should do more in the research such as the accuracy of the test and survey, and provide more knowledge of the melatonin. (words 432)

写得胃痛....

AK_小儿UID: 2784558

请无视上面那一篇吧，昨天边胃痛边写，就一把乱写了....今天看得我胃痛...所以重写了一篇

It is proposed that increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and the shyness lasts into later life by the arguer. To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer cites a survey indicating that a group of baby born in autumn when their mothers' production of melatonin increased showed the mild distress to unfamiliar stimuli. And he also gives the evidence that the grown children identified themselves as shy. However, I consider these evidences unpersuasive and the conclusion ungrounded for the reasons below.

To begin with, I'd like to point out the inaccuracy of the research. The sample size 25 is too small for a research. Perhaps that these 25 babies showed mild distress is just a coincidence. And if we enlarge the sample size, the outcome would change a lot. Furthermore, we didn't know if these infants are healthy enough. Perhaps an unhealthy infant is more likely to show mild distress than others and these 25 infants are happened to be unhealthy. In addition, no evidence shows that showing signs of mild distress to unfamiliar stimuli is an abnormal phenomenon. Maybe every infant shows the same reaction like this.

Secondly, the conclusion is established mainly based on the transportation of melatonin from mother to infant and the ability of melatonin to affect some brain functions. But unfortunately, no evidence indicates the increased levels of melatonin were transported to the infants. And despite of those, there is no fact demonstrating that it is the melatonin that caused the mild distress. That can be a result of other hormone’s affection. In a word, there is no necessary relation between showing signs of mild distress and affecting brain functions. So even if the sample size is large enough and the research is authoritative, the arguer doesn't get the rational logic.

Finally, that the arguer cites the children’s self-understanding of being shyness to strength his viewpoint that the shyness continues into later life is unpersuasive as well. As a teenager, they are disabled to have an accurate evaluation on themselves. They may be more outgoing than they expected. Additionally, environment is also one of the critical factors for a character’s shaping. Though their evaluation is accurate enough to demonstrate their shyness, it may be caused by their growing environment more than the affection of melatonin.

In sum, the author hold the opinion that the increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life is totally unconvincing when lacking of accurate evidence to demonstrate such problems above. He should do more in the research to make it more accurate, and provide more knowledge of the melatonin’s function. He also should exclude the possibility of the environment’s shaping to demonstrate the lasting affection of melatonin.

zleungUID: 2837752

It is proposed by the arguer that increased levels of melatonin before birth causeshyness during infancy and the shyness lasts into later life. To substantiatethe conclusion, the arguer cites a survey indicating that a group of baby bornin autumn(?) when their mothers'production of melatonin increased showed the mild distress to unfamiliarstimuli. And he also gives the evidence that the grown children identifiedthemselves as shy. However, I consider these evidences unpersuasive and theconclusion ungrounded for the reasons below.

To begin with, I'd like to point out theinaccuracy of the research. The sample size 25 is too small for a research.Perhaps that these 25 babies showed mild distress is just a coincidence. And ifwe enlarge the sample size, the outcome would change a lot. Furthermore, wedidn't know if these infants are healthy enough. Perhaps an unhealthy infant ismore likely to show mild distress than others and these 25 infants are happenedto be unhealthy. In addition, no evidence shows that showing signs of milddistress to unfamiliar stimuli is an abnormal phenomenon. Maybe every infantshows the same reaction like this.

Secondly, the conclusion is established mainly based(重复了,去掉)on the transportation of melatonin from mother to infant and the ability ofmelatonin to affect some brain functions. But unfortunately, no evidenceindicates the increased levels of melatonin were transported to the infants.(这句论证不错) And despite of those, there is nofact demonstrating that it is the melatonin that caused the mild distress. Thatcan be a result of other hormone’s affection. In a word, there is no necessaryrelation between showing signs of mild distress and affecting brain functions(我认为这句没有必要,作者也没有说是大脑受到了影响导致了signs of mild distress).So even if the sample size is large enough and the research is authoritative,the arguer doesn't get the rational logic.

Finally, that the arguer cites the children’sself-understanding of being shyto strength his viewpoint that the shyness continues into later life isunpersuasive as well. As a teenager, they are disabled to have an accurateevaluation on themselves. They may be more outgoing than they expected.Additionally, environment is also one of the critical factors for a character’sshaping. Even if(应该是个让步吧)their evaluation is accurate enough to demonstrate their shyness, it may becaused by their growing environment more than the affection of melatonin.

In sum, the author hold the opinion that theincreased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy andthis shyness continues into later life is totally unconvincing when lacking ofaccurate evidence to demonstrate such problems above. He should do more in theresearch to make it more accurate, and provide more knowledge of themelatonin’s function. He also should exclude the possibility of theenvironment’s shaping to demonstrate the lasting affection of melatonin.
总体不错,论证很清晰.PS:建议加上提纲