The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals."In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps, a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bact

Essay topics:

The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals.
"In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps, a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bacteria than did the liquid hand soaps currently used in our hospitals. During our recent test of regular-strength UltraClean with doctors, nurses, and visitors at our hospital in Worktown, the hospital reported significantly fewer cases of patient infection (a 20 percent reduction) than did any of the other hospitals in our group. The explanation for the 20 percent reduction in patient infections is the use of UltraClean soap."
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.

The director cites studies and tests which suggest that UltraClean soap led to greater reduction in hospital infections than the soap used currently in their hospitals. As such he concludes that it is without a doubt Ultra Clean soap that led to these reductions. Whilst this argument may seem plausible at first glance close inspection reveals that key elements of the discussion are left out and there are other explanations to explain the observed phenomena.

Firstly, the director assumes that the controlled laboratory study (which is cited) is an accurate assessment of hand soap quality when there is nothing to suggest that this is in fact the case. Who conducted the study? If the study was conducted by Ultra Clean themselves the results may be biased or even fabricated to make Ultra Clean look better than it really is. Furthermore there is nothing to suggest exactly how controlled this study was. The study may have been controlled however we do not know what variables were controlled for. Did experimenters use the same amount of Ultra Clean soap as that of the others? If a greater amount of Ultra Clean soap was used during the experiment it simply be the quantity as opposed to the quality of the soap which accounted for the reduction in bacteria. Thus to strengthen the argyment the author must provide evidence to show that the study is trustworthy.

Secondly, the direcotr’s argument suffers from a lack of quantification as he does not provide information as to exactly how many patients were or were not infected. He claims that Worktown had significantly fewer cases of infection however this may not necessarily be so as a twenty percent reduction is not necessarily significant. For example, If there were ten people infected elsewhere and only eight in Worktown this would mean that Worktown had twenty percent fewer infections however, in this scenario, a meager difference of two patients may not be considered a significant reduction. Thus the director must provide information about the amount of patients in order to give a more accurate depiction of the situation.

Lastly, the author assumes that the patient reduction of infections in Worktown is as a result of the effectiveness of Ultra Cleran’s soap however this may not necessarily be the case. Nothing is known about the conditions in Worktown compared to those elsewhere. If Worktown has cleaner conditions as well as better trained staff than other hospitals, a reduction in infections may seem to be as a result of Ultra Clean when it may in fact result from less germs in the environment to begin with. Thus the author must provide evidence to suggest that worktown has similar conditions to hospitals elsewhere.

In conclusion, there is not enough evidence to support a claim as bold as that of the director’s. Had they been enough evidence to rule out alternative explanations the argumenbt would have been a lot more convincing. One must consider all aspects of a situation before statements can be made.

Votes
Average: 4 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2019-10-17 Adebayo 43 view
2019-04-15 lintofu0516 34 view
2017-12-11 VicVic 70 view
2017-11-04 ajulyav 64 view
2017-11-02 zenith222 16 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user dion :

Comments

Sentence: Thus to strengthen the argyment the author must provide evidence to show that the study is trustworthy.
Error: argyment Suggestion: argument

Sentence: In conclusion, there is not enough evidence to support a claim as bold as that of the director's. Had they been enough evidence to rule out alternative explanations the argumenbt would have been a lot more convincing.
Error: argumenbt Suggestion: argument

--------------------
argument 1 -- not OK

argument 2 -- not OK

argument 3 -- OK
--------------------
flaws:
When you see the topic like 'Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations', it means there are no flaws for this topic but only need to give explanations. This is a new GRE essay topic which is different to traditional topics.

Let's analyze the structure of the statement and argue accordingly:

condition 1:
In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps, a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bacteria than did the liquid hand soaps currently used in our hospitals.

condition 2:
During our recent test of regular-strength UltraClean with doctors, nurses, and visitors at our hospital in Worktown, the hospital reported significantly fewer cases of patient infection (a 20 percent reduction) than did any of the other hospitals in our group.

conclusion:
The explanation for the 20 percent reduction in patient infections is the use of UltraClean soap.

then here goes the explanation:

explanation 1:
The reduction could be explained by the high concentration used. If the normal UltraClean is used instead then there could be no reduction in bacteria population.

explanation 2:
each hospital’s environment is different, and this variance yielded the difference.

explanation 3:
There could be other reasons that could account for the scant cases of infection.
-------------------------

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 500 350
No. of Characters: 2468 1500
No. of Different Words: 218 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.729 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.936 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.778 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 171 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 144 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 70 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.81 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.261 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.308 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.532 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.127 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5