In a study of the reading habits of Waymarsh citizens conducted by the University of Waymarsh, most respondents said that they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a second study conducted by the same researchers found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Waymarsh was the mystery novel. Therefore, it can be concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author of the passage claims that in the first survey to understand the reading habits of Waymarsh citizens the respondents had misrepresented their reading habits. The author’s conclusion is based on a survey on Waymarsh citizens, who said they prefer literary classics and a study which showed that public libraries in Waymarsh frequently issue mystery novels. However, the author has failed to provide cogent arguments to support the conclusion.
The author has made a fallacious assumption that the people who responded for the survey are members of the public library and issue books from there. There is however no proof to support this assumption. On the contrary, it is probable that the reading habits of the survey respondents are starkly different than those of the public library members. The survey respondents could be adults and senior citizens who prefer literary classics while the public library members could be children and young adults who prefer mystery novels. If such is the case, then the conclusion made by the author of comparing the two results is unwarranted.
Additionally, even if it is seen that the people who responded in the survey are members of the public issue, the question arises whether all of them issue books from there? The author has assumed that they do so without any proof to substantiate this claim. It is possible that the respondents do not issue books but movie and song DVDs/CDs which are often present in the libraries. It might also be possible that the respondents are inactive members of the library. Unless the author provides proof that the respondents of the survey are active library members and issue books from the library it would be fallacious to assume that they had misrepresented their reading habits in the survey.
Even when the author provides support for the questions raised above to support his conclusion, there is another important point that the author has condoned. Libraries are places from where people borrow books. It is possible that the survey respondents own books which are literary classics and hence do not need to borrow the same from the library. On the contrary, they may not possess mystery novels, which they issue from the library to satiate their reading habits.
The author has also made a dubious assumption that the public library members of Warmarsh are Warmarsh residents without any proof to support this assumption. The public libraries of Warmarsh could have a very good collection of books which inspires people from adjoining places to be members of these libraries. These people could represent a larger section of the library members whose reading habits are different from Warmarsh residents. Therefore, it would be fallacious to conclude that the survey respondents misinterpreted their reading habits.
To conclude, though at first glance he conclusion made by the author seems possible, an in depth analysis of the argument shows that the author has failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his claim. The questions raised above needs to be answered before a conclusion similar to that made by the author can be made about the respondents of the survey.
- In a study of the reading habits of Waymarsh citizens conducted by the University of Waymarsh, most respondents said that they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a second study conducted by the same researchers found that the type o 62
- The following appeared in a memo from New Ventures Consulting to the president of HobCo, Inc., a chain of hobby shops."Our team has completed its research on suitable building sites for a new HobCo hobby Shop in the city of Grilldon. We discovered that th 61
- The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine."In 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, with abundant numbers of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of amphibi 50
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station."Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the comp 50
- A recent sales study indicates that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent during the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants whose specialty is seafood. Moreover, the majority of f 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 310, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
...urvey respondents are starkly different than those of the public library members. Th...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'while', 'on the contrary']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.249103942652 0.25644967241 97% => OK
Verbs: 0.175627240143 0.15541462614 113% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0878136200717 0.0836205057962 105% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0376344086022 0.0520304965353 72% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0358422939068 0.0272364105082 132% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.121863799283 0.125424944231 97% => OK
Participles: 0.0340501792115 0.0416121511921 82% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.63420241305 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0304659498208 0.026700313972 114% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.136200716846 0.113004496875 121% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0161290322581 0.0255425247493 63% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0232974910394 0.0127820249294 182% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3193.0 2731.13054187 117% => OK
No of words: 519.0 446.07635468 116% => OK
Chars per words: 6.15221579961 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7730044521 4.57801047555 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.420038535645 0.378187486979 111% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.28901734104 0.287650121315 100% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.179190751445 0.208842608468 86% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.111753371869 0.135150697306 83% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63420241305 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 207.018472906 91% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.364161849711 0.469332199767 78% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 41.7412475972 52.1807786196 80% => OK
How many sentences: 23.0 20.039408867 115% => OK
Sentence length: 22.5652173913 23.2022227129 97% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.6107886949 57.7814097925 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.826086957 141.986410481 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5652173913 23.2022227129 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.521739130435 0.724660767414 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 51.4669514954 51.9672348444 99% => OK
Elegance: 1.62589928058 1.8405768891 88% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.472144936391 0.441005458295 107% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.157018382289 0.135418324435 116% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0901436838848 0.0829849096947 109% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.618810690285 0.58762219726 105% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.170338123876 0.147661913831 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.220127838145 0.193483328276 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109305648145 0.0970749176394 113% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.531919955304 0.42659136922 125% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.141288844176 0.0774707102158 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.347724731627 0.312017818177 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0759166401443 0.0698173142475 109% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.33743842365 60% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.87684729064 44% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 15.0 4.82512315271 311% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 4.0 6.46551724138 62% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 5.36822660099 56% => OK
Neutral topic words: 12.0 2.82389162562 425% => Less neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 19.0 14.657635468 130% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
More arguments wanted.
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.