You worked pretty good on this task. But try to extend a little bit with this info. It is also from Argument Practice and contains brainstar arguments. Agree with comments above...you have some grammar mistakes. Do you know any friend who might proofread it? Also you may find people who will help you with editing mistakes. And good luck!

mnromero,

Lets review your response before I post my version of it.

I would say it is a good response which meets the requirements of the task at hand. So well done! There are however some grammatical errors and minor errors in your logic which can take away some value out of your response. Don't be demoralized by the number of changes suggested, just take it in your stride and as part of your learning curve. See below:
Key:
Underlined letters/words are additions,
Bold letters/words are deletions/modifications
Letters/words in Italics are my explanation/suggestion

The author's argument that firstborn humans have different individual’s levels of stimulation is flawed. In the argument, the author only mentions monkey studies in stimulating situations and one study about firstborn human and pregnancy period (It is nowhere mentioned in the passage that only one study was conducted so I recommend modifying that phrase to something like evidence for substantial studies of first born humans have not been shown thereby making the claim less convincing) . In doing so, the author fails to consider research in other fields of psychology.

The underlying study of rhesus monkeys states that firstborn infant monkeys produce twice as much of the hormone cortisol as their siblings, when this evidence of eighteen monkeys is unwarranted. Another explanation is that monkeys and humans react differently on an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey(situation would be a better word to use in place of monkey), because humans have a different (an evolved would be a better word to use) rational thinking.

The second study is based on firstborn humans and women during pregnancy. In the first case, firstborn humans may have more experiences than their sibling. For example, the return of a parent after an absence might be different for both depending on how attached they are with that relative. Psychology studies with twins found interesting results about individual levels of stimulation (This is a fact not presented in the argument. So it would be good to cite the source of the information and also the interesting result you are talking about). In the second case, mothers who had had several offspring could have learnt how to control hormone cortisol with their firstborn child.(you are not required to provide the rationale for a claim in the argument)

The argument could be strengthened if the editor provided information regarding other fields as psychology. As it stands, however, the argument is flawed for the reasons indicated.

My solution:

The author through the above argument is trying to establish a co-relation between birth order and the level of stimulation in monkeys and extending the concept to humans as well. In my opinion, the sample size of the monkeys (18 Rhesus) is not large enough to come to this conclusion. Moreover the study should be conducted with more variables such as other species of monkeys; other primates such as orangutans, gorillas etc; under many more stimulating situations to fully ascertain this conclusion. The claim that 1st born humans exhibit similar behavior must be substantiated by scientific evidence. And when it comes to humans, the variables to be taken into consideration are many more such as social conditioning of the child, the child's ability to think rationally etc. I would say that more evidence and scientific backing is needed to make the authors claim more plausible and convincing.

The author arguments that firstborn humans have different individual’s levels of stimulation is flawed. In the discussion, the author only mentions monkey studies in stimulating situations and one survey about firstborn human and pregnancy period. In doing so, the author fails to consider research in other fields.
The underlying study of rhesus monkeys states that firstborn infant monkeys produce twice as much of the hormone cortisol as their siblings when this evidence of eighteen monkeys is unwarranted. Another explanation is that monkeys and humans react differently encountering with an unfamiliar monkey because humans have different rational thinking.

The second study, based on firstborn humans and women during pregnancy. In the first case, firstborn humans may have more experiences than their sibling. For example, the return of a parent after an absence might be different for both depending on how attached are with that relative. Psychology studies with twins found exciting results about individual levels of stimulation. In the second case, mothers who had had several offspring could have learned how to control hormone cortisol with their firstborn child.

The argument can strengthen if the editor provided information regarding other fields such as psychology. As it stands, however, the case is flawed for the reasons indicated

In order to improve writing skills, you should read more literature. You can also use special applications for grammar checking, such as, for example, Grammarly or Sapling.

That was a good essay. About word limits – it’s not the biggest and most important thing of concern here in the GRE AWA section. You have half an hour to write a substantial essay. Good try.

Hi! I was practicing with the same prompt and would like if anyone could take a look at it

In the letter presented to the editor of a scientific journal, it is stated that firstborn humans produce higher amounts of cortisol when facing a stimulating situation (the return of a parent or meeting someone for the first time) than their younger siblings. The writer comes to this conclusion based on a study performed on rhesus monkeys in which the firstborn monkeys showed higher cortisol levels than the others, and first-time mothers evidenced elevated cortisol in comparison with mothers who had several offspring. However, there are other different explanations that could rival the proposed one.
First of all, the author of the letter is assuming that humans and monkeys have the same reactions to stimulating situations, leaving out of consideration the differences in the frontal lobe (in charge of receiving the cortisol signal) development of these two animals. The more advanced frontal lobe of the human might have a different relation among stimulating situations and cortisol production than that of monkeys. In this case, the proposition of the writer would be flawed.
Secondly, the results found in the study might be biased; the research was performed on eighteen monkeys but, there is no further information about the significance of the sample, or how the eighteen monkeys were chosen. If for example, the participants of the research belonged to a zoo, the conditions and exposure to external stimuli would have affected their cortisol levels in ways different from those of wild monkeys. Therefore, the result might not be representative of all the monkeys, but only the ones observed, undermining the conclusion reached by the author of the letter.
Thirdly, the conclusion reached is not pondering that not all stimulating situations are the same and consequently, biological reactions will also differ. In the research shown the stimulating situation was meeting new monkeys, and the other example given by the author is the return of a parent but, the term stimulating situation is too broad; eating might be considered a stimulating situation, as well as running, and these might not vary the cortisol levels in monkeys or humans. Thus, the premise of the author might be easily critiqued.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands now is considerately flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to prove the similarity of cortisol mechanisms in humans and rhesus monkeys, the validity of the research and a more narrow definition of stimulating situations, then it would be possible to support the given thesis.

Please, if you want your essay review follow the forum guidelines

Pretty simple

https://gre.myprepclub.com/forum/gpc-guide ... 13231.html


Our Definitive guide for the AWA

https://gre.myprepclub.com/forum/the-defin ... -3426.html

Regards