ARGUMENT53 [Victors小组]第八次作业 by jennetrj

jennetrjUID: 2275453

53. 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.

552  WORDS


In this argument, the author concludes that high level of melatonin before birth is the cause for shyness during infancy which could continue to people's later life. To justify this conclusion, the author cites a following up research about 25 infants who showed mild distress signs were more likely to be conceived in early autumn, when maternal melatonin is usually high at that time. In this thirteen-year study, it showed that half of them considered themselves as shy while being a teen-ager. At first glance, the argument seems to be somehow plausible, but close scrutiny reveals several flaws in it.

To begin with, the reliability of the research cited in the passage is still open to question. First, the author unfairly assumes that those 25 infants could be the representative of the general. No evidence provided in the passage can support it. It is totally possible that the annual new born is about two millions over the country and 25 infants happened to showed signs of mild distress. Besides, the author fails to indicate whether 13 years are long enough for the researchers to follow up. Maybe such psychological study should take researchers much longer than that, for instance, about 50 years, to reflect the exact influence of people's personality. Until the author provides enough evidence to show the reliability of the study, the conclusion based on it could not be taken seriously.

Even assuming the research is statistically reliable, the author unfairly alleges that infants who showed signs of mild distress could be considered as shy. We could hardly reach the assumption that sign of mild distress is the indication of shyness. Maybe infants just didn't like unfamiliar stimuli, or they might be unwilling to be with those strange things when they were just born. And if they were shy, no promise could be made that it should attribute to high level of melatonin when they were conceived in early autumn. The only relationship provided in the passage between these two events is that the earlier one coincided with the latter. Maybe those infants happened to have shy parents, or there's the possibility that those infants had no contact with people other than the researchers, which is responsible for infant’s temporary distress. Either scenario, if true, would serve to undermine the assumption that infants conceived in early autumn would produce shyness soon after birth.

On another hand, although following up study indicated self-assumed shyness, it doesn't warrant that they really developed it. Apparently, such diagnosis should be made by some specialists other than by oneself. Or even that they are shy in their teen-ages, perhaps after years of social activities, they could overcome it. Author's failure to consider such possibilities renders the assumption that shyness would continue into later life of those people.

In sum, the argument is groundless as it stands. To consolidate it, the author should provide more evidence--maybe by more psychological evaluations--to show that infants conceived in early autumn are more likely to be shy than others. In addition, the author should ensure us the reliability of the study and establish the causal relationship between shyness and high level of maternal melatonin. To better assess the argument, we need more evidence to show that such shyness would continue to be presented with those people life long.

solartorchUID: 2244205

In this argument, the author concludes that high level of melatonin before birth is the cause for shyness during infancy which could continue to people's later life. To justify this conclusion, the author cites a following up research about 25 infants who showed mild distress signs were more likely to be conceived in early autumn, when maternal melatonin is usually high at that time. In this thirteen-year study, it showed that half of them considered themselves as shy while being a teen-ager. At first glance, the argument seems to be somehow plausible, but close scrutiny reveals several flaws in it. [第一段先restate然后引出下文。]

To begin with, the reliability of the research cited in the passage is still open to question. First, the author unfairly assumes that those 25 infants could be the representative of the general. No evidence provided in the passage can support it. It is totally possible that the annual new born is about two millions over the country and 25 infants happened to showed signs of mild distress. Besides, the author fails to indicate whether 13 years are long enough for the researchers to follow up. Maybe such psychological study should take researchers much longer than that, for instance, about 50 years, to reflect the exact influence of people's personality. Until the author provides enough evidence to show the reliability of the study, the conclusion based on it could not be taken seriously.[先说research的reliability的问题。1，sample也许没有random的取。2，时间不够长。]

Even assuming the research is statistically reliable, the author unfairly alleges that infants who showed signs of mild distress could be considered as shy. We could hardly reach the assumption that sign of mild distress is the indication of shyness. Maybe infants just didn't like unfamiliar stimuli, or they might be unwilling to be with those strange things when they were just born. And if they were shy, no promise could be made that it should attribute to high level of melatonin when they were conceived in early autumn. The only relationship provided in the passage between these two events is that the earlier one coincided with the latter. Maybe those infants happened to have shy parents, or there's the possibility that those infants had no contact with people other than the researchers, which is responsible for infant’s temporary distress. Either scenario, if true, would serve to undermine the assumption that infants conceived in early autumn would produce shyness soon after birth. [这段首句和尾句有点gap.首句只是说mild distress不能considered as shy, 中间来了个if让步后到了末句就成了early aturumn和shyness after born没有关系了。一般来说这样的情况可以分两段写，个人意见]

On another hand, although following up study indicated self-assumed shyness, it doesn't warrant that they really developed it. Apparently, such diagnosis should be made by some specialists other than by oneself. [这点说得很好]Or even that they are shy in their teen-ages, perhaps after years of social activities, they could overcome it. Author's failure to consider such possibilities renders the assumption that shyness would continue into later life of those people.

In sum, the argument is groundless as it stands. To consolidate it, the author should provide more evidence--maybe by more psychological evaluations--to show that infants conceived in early autumn are more likely to be shy than others. In addition, the author should ensure us the reliability of the study and establish the causal relationship between shyness and high level of maternal melatonin. To better assess the argument, we need more evidence to show that such shyness would continue to be presented with those people life long.

觉得这篇argument楼主主要条理就是分两点批，一个是infants shy,一个是之后shy.但总感觉稍稍有点乱（相比楼主以前的argument），语言什么都就不说了，很好了。