A recent study rating 300 male and female Mentian advertising executives according to the average number of hours they sleep per night showed an association between the amount of sleep the executives need and the success of their firms. Of the advertising firms studied, those whose executives reported needing no more than 6 hours of sleep per night had higher profit margins and faster growth. These results suggest that if a business wants to prosper, it should hire only people who need less than 6 hours of sleep per night."
With the information provided, the assumption leading to conclusion remains unfounded. This argument is well presented yet fat-fetched. This author claims that correlation of sleep of employee with success of factory. Besides, provide that a firm wants to flourish; it should hire only people who need less than 6 hour of sleep per night. Hence, this conclusion is ill-founded.
The primary assumption underlying the author's conclusion is that there is a stringent relation between sleep and success in the firm. Nevertheless, he fails to preclude other possibility that might lead to success. As a matter of fact, we all know that there is a tremendous factors such as experience of the employee, a considerable amount of their diligently which is highly vital for success. Moreover, we can take heed to location of firm and number of worker is corresponds to development and growth without any doubt.
Furthermore, the author of the statement avers that as long as a factory wants to prosper, it ought to hire people who their asleep is greatly limited. Want of such prudent answers make to conclusion full of holes. However, he fails to take other possible reason into account for triumphing a firm like changing machine or updating them as soon as possible, hiring people who they are considerably perseverance in their work. Besides having a high spirit would be indispensable for each success. In fact, taking attention just to asleep per night is not adequate for advancement.
In short, as discussed the conclusion cannot be tenable. The author should have provided information about detail of success not just asleep. Indeed, other factors such as number of worker, level of experience and knowledge. On the other hand to make a rigid conclusion is very myopic observation method. After all, feckless attempt, with a fallible method could be noting a fool's errand.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 315, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'hour' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'hours'.
Suggestion: hours
...d hire only people who need less than 6 hour of sleep per night. Hence, this conclus...
^^^^
Line 3, column 39, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... The primary assumption underlying the authors conclusion is that there is a stringent...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 276, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'factor'?
Suggestion: factor
... we all know that there is a tremendous factors such as experience of the employee, a c...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 376, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'fools'' or 'fool's'?
Suggestion: fools'; fool's
...ith a fallible method could be noting a fools errand.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, furthermore, hence, however, moreover, nevertheless, so, well, after all, in fact, in short, such as, as a matter of fact, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1579.0 2260.96107784 70% => OK
No of words: 306.0 441.139720559 69% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.16013071895 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18244613648 4.56307096286 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86458926782 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.584967320261 0.468620217663 125% => OK
syllable_count: 470.7 705.55239521 67% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.915431194 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.1052631579 119.503703932 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1052631579 23.324526521 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.84210526316 5.70786347227 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.122963837187 0.218282227539 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0351095552049 0.0743258471296 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0410734265949 0.0701772020484 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0756602403956 0.128457276422 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0371292413357 0.0628817314937 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 14.3799401198 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 48.3550499002 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.197005988 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 98.500998004 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 12.3882235529 44% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.