"A folk remedy* for insomnia, the scent in lavender flowers, has now been proved effective. In a recent study, 30 volunteers with chronic insomnia slept each night for three weeks on lavender-scented pillows in a controlled room where their sleep was moni

The author concludes that the traditional remedy for insomnia using the lavender scent is proved its effectiveness within a short period by the study. At first glance, it seems to be persuasive. However, careful scrutiny of this argument reveals that it suffers from several logical flaws, which render it unconvincing.

First and foremost, the author assumes that only lavender-scented pillows affected the result of the study. However, there might be several conditions that can have an impact on sleep status such as drinking before going to sleep, stress level during the day, and environmental noises like light, sound, and temperature in a controlled room. Without securing these conditions constantly, the author cannot justify the experiment process is reliable.

Moreover, the author’s assumption that due to the lavender remedy, the volunteers slept longer and more soundly during the third week has a problem. The author does not take account into other possible reasons. Perhaps, it might can be because of fatigue during last two weeks, or the subjects might get accustomed to the experimental environment including the lavender scent, which actually disturbed sleep initially. Thus, to bolster this argument, the author should provide more clear evidence that the improvement of the insomnia among the subjectives is only due to the effectiveness of remedy.

Finally, even assuming the above assumptions are all true, the problem of the statistical validity remains on the study result. The author assumes that the number of the subjectives are statistically significant and the three-week period is sufficient for proving the remedy’s effectuality. Yet, these might be only for this study case. Without providing the evidence of the experiment’s statistical reliability, the author’s conclusion is unjustifiable.

In conclusion, the author’s argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and is therefore unconvincing as it stands. To justify this argument, the author should provide sufficient evidence and information that will eliminate all the above doubtful questions. Then, the argument can be completely well reasoned.

Votes
Average: 6 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Sentence: Thus, to bolster this argument, the author should provide more clear evidence that the improvement of the insomnia among the subjectives is only due to the effectiveness of remedy.
Error: subjectives Suggestion: No alternate word

Sentence: The author assumes that the number of the subjectives are statistically significant and the three-week period is sufficient for proving the remedy's effectuality.
Error: three-week Suggestion: three week
Error: effectuality Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: subjectives Suggestion: No alternate word

-------------------
argument 1 -- not OK. This is a study, so if there are external impacts, they can be applied to everyone. Well, you may say, this works only for a controlled room, there would be different if they stay at home.

argument 2 -- OK

argument 3 -- OK. Same as argument 1.

--------------------
one more suggested argument:
It works in three weeks, how is future after three weeks?

----------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 325 350
No. of Characters: 1784 1500
No. of Different Words: 179 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.246 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.489 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.965 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 109 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.118 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.245 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.588 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.333 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.564 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.041 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5

What I tried to point out in argument 1 is the sleep conditions(or causes) to affect insomnia for each volunteers can be different. So if in a controlled room, any of these conditions were eliminated for some volunteers, they might sleep better not because of only the lavender pillow. Thus, it can be a flaw without considering each volunteers' sleep conditions that cause insomnia.

Better to accept that the test is very 'ideal' and same conditions can be applied to everyone.

In GRE, we have to accept all data or evidence are true. It is important to find out loopholes behind surveys or studies. Loopholes mean that we accept all surveys told are true, but there are some conditions applied, for example:

It works for time A (10 years ago), but it doesn't mean it works for time B (nowadays).

It works for location A (a city, community, nation), but it doesn't mean it works for location B (another city, community, nation).

It works for people A (a manager), but it doesn't mean it works for people B (a worker).

It works for event A (one event, project... ), but it doesn't mean it works for event B (another event, project...).