Section 6

“’45 percent’ of kids in one small study ‘reported significant PTSD signs’; ’83 percent reported elevated hostility scores.”

This is an example of a factual/numerical claim, as it presents specific numerical data that can be objectively proven or disproven based on the study methods used and their results. Factual/numerical claims can be based on facts used to state a claim and Numerical claims are based on numbers to make a claim.

I asked the lead scientist, Marinus van IJzendoorn of Leiden University, what might account for other studies’ finding of secondary trauma in vets’ spouses or kids.

The statement is considered a questioning claim because it presents a question about a specific topic. In this case, The author is expressing curiosity and seeking info from the lead scientist, Marinus van IJzendoorn of Leiden Univerity, about the possible reasons or factors that might explain why studies have found evidence of secondary trauma in veterans’ spouses or children.

But then in 2003, a team of Dutch and Israeli researchers meta-analyzed 31 of the papers on Holocaust survivors’ families, and concluded—to the fury of some clinicians—that when more rigorous controls were applied, there was no evidence for the intergenerational transmission of trauma.

This is an example of a contrastive claim as it is evident in the opposing views presented: on the one hand, the team of researchers concluded that, with more rigorous controls, there was no evidence for the intergenerational transmission of trauma in Holocaust survivors’ families. On the other hand, that statement notes that some clinicians were furious about this conclusion, suggesting a disagreement or contrast in perspectives within the field. Contrastive claims highlight differences, contradictions, or opposing viewpoints to underscore the complexity or controversy surrounding a particular issue. In this particular case, it emphasizes disagreement between the researchers’ findings and the clinician’s perspectives.