Airline industry representatives have recently argued that flying is safer than driving, citing two seperate studies. First, US statistics show that each year there are approximately 40,000 deathsin automobile accidentsverss only approximately 200 in flight accidents. Second studies indicate that pilots are four times less likely than average to have accidents on road.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to determine whether the argument is reasonable. Be sure to explain what effects the answers to these questions would have on the validity of the argument.
The author concludes that flying is safer than driving citing two reasons. A statistical figure that says the total number of death are mugh higher because of automobile accidents and the other is a study that indicates that pilots are four times less likely to have accidents. The argument has many loopholes which must be filled by the author to make the argument strong.
First, the author must give the figure of total number of passengers that travel by flight and automobiles respectively. If the number of people that commute via automobile is exponentially greater than that travelling by the air, then the percentage of passangers that travel by air having accident can become higher than the percentage of accidents occuring on the road. For example, if 10000000 people travel by road and only 10000 travel by plane in US. Then the chances of accidents come out to be higher in plane than automobile. Therefore, to bolster his claim of flying being safe, the author must answer this question of total number of passengers travelling through both these modes.
Moreover, is the average passengers per vehicle same for automobile and planes? Only the figure of how much safer the pilots are from drivers can be misleading if not accompanied by the number of passengers each of take risk of per trip. If the pilots carry 10 times number of passangers per vehicle in the automobile, then even f they are 4 times safer than the drivers, but they would still be potentially more deleterious than the driving in automobiles. So, in order to reach the correct conclusion, the author must produce this statistic of how many average passengers per vehicle does the pilot and drivers carry. This would help to truly reflect which of them is safer in true sense.
Also, the statistics that the author has produced to show the number of accident deaths is not comprehensive of number of accidents taking place. It is quite possible that there are more accidents in flight but deaths are low. In this case, we cannot equate deaths with safety. Therefore, the author must answer how many accidents took place every year and not just the deaths.
Another incompleteness in the statistics is that the time horizon of consideration for the data is missing. It is quite possible that these data were collected over a small time horizon of 1 or 2 years which is not representative of the average. There may be outlying incidents that could have led to biased results like rail accident etc in the time considered. To negate this possibility author must put forth the time horizon for the statistic and ensure that the data is completely representative and unbiased, collected over a sufficiently large period of time, atleast 5 - 10 year
In sum, there are various questions which need to be answered in order to evaluate the argument. In the absence of these, the argument is weak and tenuous. The author must present the evidences asked for above, so that a holistic picture can be drawn and the argument can be comprehended without logical fallacies.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 284, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...centage of passangers that travel by air having accident can become higher than t...
^^
Line 9, column 552, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...ed, collected over a sufficiently large period of time, atleast 5 - 10 year In sum, there a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'so', 'still', 'then', 'therefore', 'for example']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.24064171123 0.25644967241 94% => OK
Verbs: 0.158645276292 0.15541462614 102% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0766488413547 0.0836205057962 92% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0499108734403 0.0520304965353 96% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0124777183601 0.0272364105082 46% => OK
Prepositions: 0.156862745098 0.125424944231 125% => OK
Participles: 0.0427807486631 0.0416121511921 103% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.675861502 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0196078431373 0.026700313972 73% => OK
Particles: 0.0017825311943 0.001811407834 98% => OK
Determiners: 0.112299465241 0.113004496875 99% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0285204991087 0.0255425247493 112% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0213903743316 0.0127820249294 167% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3055.0 2731.13054187 112% => OK
No of words: 519.0 446.07635468 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.88631984586 6.12365571057 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7730044521 4.57801047555 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.342967244701 0.378187486979 91% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.227360308285 0.287650121315 79% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.161849710983 0.208842608468 77% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.11753371869 0.135150697306 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.675861502 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 207.018472906 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.460500963391 0.469332199767 98% => OK
Word variations: 53.4703494967 52.1807786196 102% => OK
How many sentences: 23.0 20.039408867 115% => OK
Sentence length: 22.5652173913 23.2022227129 97% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.948883224 57.7814097925 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.826086957 141.986410481 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5652173913 23.2022227129 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.478260869565 0.724660767414 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 45.3012482198 51.9672348444 87% => OK
Elegance: 1.99193548387 1.8405768891 108% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.143432197587 0.441005458295 33% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.139726531516 0.135418324435 103% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0757305778338 0.0829849096947 91% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.574607695362 0.58762219726 98% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.146476703375 0.147661913831 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0737294286078 0.193483328276 38% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0585164576752 0.0970749176394 60% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.423674197192 0.42659136922 99% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0561662005112 0.0774707102158 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107235734442 0.312017818177 34% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0336545963879 0.0698173142475 48% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.87684729064 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.82512315271 62% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 12.0 5.36822660099 224% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.82389162562 71% => OK
Total topic words: 20.0 14.657635468 136% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.