The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.
“Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist,
visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his
observations that children in Tertia were reared by
an entire village rather than by their own biological
parents. However, my recent interviews with
children living in the group of islands that includes
Tertia show that these children spend much more
time talking about their biological parents than
about other adults in the village. This research of
mine proves that Dr. Field’s conclusion about
Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the
observation-centered approach to studying cultures
is invalid as well. The interview-centered method
that my team of graduate students is currently
using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate
understanding of child-rearing traditions there and
in other island cultures.”
Dr. Karp, in his recent article arrogantly claims that both Tertia culture and Dr. Field’s observation-based methodology is invalid presenting the result of the interviews his team made with the islanders as an evidence. Even at first glance,the argument seems plausible more evidence on the content of interviews, criterias for cultural validity and content of Dr. Fields interviews are necessary.
The first evidence shown by Dr. Karp is his interviews with children living at the island. He claims that children are talking much about their biological parents rather than the other adults on the island. However, we don’t know the content of the interviews if the questions asked are biased aiming to make those children talk about their biological parents, the evidence presented as valid to present island culture as invalid becomes merely a distortion of facts. Dr. Karp must have presented the interview questions, the childrens answers and the setting that interviews take place. For example, if Dr. Karp first tells them about non-islanders perception of their biological parents and ask them to compare it with their own perception of their biological parents its very like that the interview will focus on their biologial parents rather than other adults.
Secondly, even if the interviews were totally unbiased children talking much about their biological parents does not mean that the culture of the island is totally invalid. There must be a specific criteria presented considering their abilities as adults, charachters they exhibit and their overall well being. It is very likely for children to talk about a new concept, in this case their biological parents, since it is unfamiliar to them creates a wonder.
Finally, Dr. Karp claims that Dr. Field’s observation based approach is invalid showing his, also invalid, findings as an evidence. Since he can’t vindicate his findings and approach, refuting Dr. Field’s approach is not sound. He should present the findings of both studies, observations and interviews lead to those findings and then make a comparison between two approaches. As it stands, Dr. Karp might be fallacious by intervening the lifes of islanders by interviewing to them and distracting them from their routine daily and that might be creating a total new setting for islanders. If this is the case, the findings of Dr. Karp is totally invalid which makes his evidence against Dr. Field invalid as well.
To conclude, Dr. Karp’s arguments are highly unpersuasive as it stands. To make more informed judgements on both validity of islanders life style and Dr. Fields observation-based methodolgy more evidence most be presented.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-10-05 | Tugba Ozturk | 66 | view |
- 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 58
- "A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys 23
- Claim: The best way to understand the character of a society is to examine the character of the men and women that the society chooses as its heroes or its role models.Reason: Heroes and role models reveal a society's highest ideals.Write a response in wh 66
- The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.“Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist,visited the island of Tertia and concluded from hisobservations that children in Tertia were reared byan entire village rath 66
- "A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys 23
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 247, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
...ers as an evidence. Even at first glance,the argument seems plausible more evidence ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 199, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'criterion'?
Suggestion: criterion
...tally invalid. There must be a specific criteria presented considering their abilities a...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, well, as for, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 58.6224719101 80% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2288.0 2235.4752809 102% => OK
No of words: 424.0 442.535393258 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.39622641509 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53775939005 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90207065075 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 215.323595506 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.469339622642 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 680.4 704.065955056 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.1930680748 60.3974514979 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.588235294 118.986275619 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.9411764706 23.4991977007 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.17647058824 5.21951772744 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198767385596 0.243740707755 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0840053680706 0.0831039109588 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.061729567552 0.0758088955206 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128820163717 0.150359130593 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0555783252906 0.0667264976115 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.34 12.1639044944 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.66 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 100.480337079 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: 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.