argument53

_xtUID: 2599830

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.

In this argument the author cites a research that 25 infants, who are highly likely to have been conceived in early autumn, when exposed to unfamiliar stimulus, showed distress, and that when these infants grew to teenagers they thought themselves are shy. Resting on this research the author comes to the conclusion that mothers' higher levels of melatonin before birth, which raises in early autumn, results in the shyness of the children. This contention, however, is suspectable as it stands.

In the first place, a test on only 25 infants is commonly insufficient to support any assumption in this research. Unless further evidence is avaliable to show that these 25 infants is sufficiently representative to all the population, any conclusion drawn from the research would be unconvincing to me. What's more, the author fails to inform us the procedure of the infants selecting. It is highly likely that the survey purposely employed those infants who born in June or in July and so that they having been conceived in early autumn was an acomplished facts. If this is the case, the conclusion that those infants who showed distress in reponce to unfamiliar stimulus is more likely to have been conceived in early autumn is untenable.

Even if the infants were chosen randomly, the conclusion drawn from the survey is still questionable. Failing to be informed of the details of the procedure of the research, I suspect that any infant will naturally show distress in responce to that unfamiliar stimulus mentioned by the author when this stimulus may be an extreme bad-smell or a horrible voice recording. If all the infants, no matter born in early autumn or not, will react the same as the argument scribes, the research may lend little support to the author's conclusion.

Even if all the infants tested were chosen randomly, the assumption the conclusion rests on that the increase of mothers' production of melationin causes the shyness in their children's late life is quesionable. There's no evidence provided throughout the argument to support the assumption. Even if the melationin do have some effect on brain functions, the author fails to point out what kind of effect it has and whether the mother's melationin can affect the infant when in matix. It may be the fact that mother's melationin only promotes the infant to grow. It may also be true that the rise of the level of melationin due to the decrease of daylight in early autumn is so sutble that it has no effect on the infants at all. Since there's on evidence lends support to the assumption, the claim that the correlation of molationin and shyness of children is causal relationship is unwarranted.

The last but not least, the result of the survey that most those children who had the test when were infants identified themselve as shy when they are teenageres is quite dubious to me. Firstly, common sense tells us that many children are likely to become what they are respect to be or what they thought themselve should be as they are too younge to make own judgement. Have they ever informed of the results of the tests that they had took? If so, they may believe the results and then thought them "should" be shy due to the effect of melationin even when they don't know whether they are truely shy in reality. Secondly, the author fails to inform us how the survey is conducted and who conduct it. If the answers of the survey are leading, it's easy to come to the result that has been respected by the conducters. If it is the case, the survey itself is unconvincing, no mention the conclusion drawn from it. Thirdly, the author fails to consider other crucial factors may lead to teenagers' shyness instead of melationin such as the lack of self-confidence or a miserable growing background. Unless the survey is conducted in a right way and there is evidence accessible to substantiate that children's shyness entirely results from the high level of melationin during infants time, the conclusion that the shyness continues into their later life is unpersuasive.

In conclusion, the augument is unconvincing as it stands. In order to support the conclusion that increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life, the research should continue to test sufficient randomly selected infants. The author should provide relevant evidence to explain the correlation of high level of melationin and children's shyness is causal relationship. The researchers should also guarantee that the growing backgrouds of every employed children are similar, which seems to be unfeasible in reality.

tanyujing2UID: 2600111

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.

In this argument the author cites a research that 25 infants, who are highly likely to have been conceived in early autumn, when exposed to unfamiliar stimulus, showed distress, and that when these infants grew to teenagers they thought themselves are shy. Resting on this research the author comes to the conclusion that mothers' higher levels of melatonin before birth, which raises in early autumn, results in the shyness of the children. This contention, however, is suspectable as it stands.

In the first place, a test on only 25 infants is commonly insufficient to support any assumption in this research. Unless further evidence is avaliable to show that these 25 infants is sufficiently representative to all the population, any conclusion drawn from the research would be unconvincing to me. What's more, the author fails to inform us the procedure of the infants selecting. It is highly likely that the survey purposely employed those infants who born in June or in July and so that they having been conceived in early autumn was an acomplished facts. If this is the case, the conclusion that those infants who showed distress in reponce to unfamiliar stimulus is more likely to have been conceived in early autumn is untenable.
质疑“敏感婴儿出生在秋季”，我觉得你可以这么反驳，你可以说：可能别的婴儿也敏感，但是不是出生在秋季。
Even if the infants were chosen randomly, the conclusion drawn from the survey is still questionable. Failing to be informed of the details of the procedure of the research, I suspect that any infant will naturally show distress in responce to that unfamiliar stimulus mentioned by the author when this stimulus may be an extreme bad-smell or a horrible voice recording. If all the infants, no matter born in early autumn or not, will react the same as the argument scribes, the research may lend little support to the author's conclusion.

Even if all the infants tested were chosen randomly, the assumption the conclusion rests on that the increase of mothers' production of melationin causes the shyness in their children's late life is quesionable. There's no evidence provided throughout the argument to support the assumption. Even if the melationin do have some effect on brain functions, the author fails to point out what kind of effect it has and whether the mother's melationin can affect the infant when in matix. It may be the fact that mother's melationin only promotes the infant to grow. It may also be true that the rise of the level of melationin due to the decrease of daylight in early autumn is so sutble that it has no effect on the infants at all. Since there's on evidence lends support to the assumption, the claim that the correlation of molationin and shyness of children is causal relationship is unwarranted.

The last but not least, the result of the survey that most those children who had the test when were infants identified themselve as shy when they are teenageres is quite dubious to me. Firstly, common sense tells us that many children are likely to become what they are respect to be or what they thought themselve should be as they are too younge to make own judgement. Have they ever informed of the results of the tests that they had took? If so, they may believe the results and then thought them "should" be shy due to the effect of melationin even when they don't know whether they are truely shy in reality. Secondly, the author fails to inform us how the survey is conducted and who conduct it. If the answers of the survey are leading, it's easy to come to the result that has been respected by the conducters. If it is the case, the survey itself is unconvincing, no mention the conclusion drawn from it. Thirdly, the author fails to consider other crucial factors may lead to teenagers' shyness instead of melationin such as the lack of self-confidence or a miserable growing background. Unless the survey is conducted in a right way and there is evidence accessible to substantiate that children's shyness entirely results from the high level of melationin during infants time, the conclusion that the shyness continues into their later life is unpersuasive.
这一段的表述很新颖，用心理学的观点很有说服力！

In conclusion, the augument is unconvincing as it stands. In order to support the conclusion that increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life, the research should continue to test sufficient randomly selected infants. The author should provide relevant evidence to explain the correlation of high level of melationin and children's shyness is causal relationship. The researchers should also guarantee that the growing backgrouds of every employed children are similar, which seems to be unfeasible in reality.

这篇文章有一些拼写错误，我就不一一指出来了~你在word里面查看吧~
最好是一开始用中文写上每一段的大意，这样就清晰多拉~
你是限制时间写出来的吗？如果是，就很好了，而且感觉不模式化！