Airline industry representatives have recently argued that flying is safer than driving, citing two separate studies. First, U.S. statistics show that each year there are approximately 40,000 deaths in automobile accidents versus only approximately 200 in flight accidents. Second, studies indicate that pilots are four times less likely than average to have accidents on the road
The argument states that Flying is safer than driving because of a smaller number of accidents annually. however, the argument makes a series of unsolicited assumptions and would need and revision even if any of these assumptions might not come true.
US statistics show that each year there are approximately 40,000 deaths in automobile accidents versus only approximately 200 in-flight accidents however these numbers are absolute and can paint a very misleading picture, for instance, let's say those 40,000 deaths in the automobile sector are caused from the denominator of 1 million drivers and 200 flight accidents caused from the denominator of 1000, now espousing towards flying looks scary, without the knowledge of the overall count of both the sectors, declaring one safe over another will be premature.
The argument also assumes that the infrastructure of both sectors are incomparable state but what if few roads are poorly developed or are in haphazard condition and contributes majorly to the accidents as compared to other, so before knowing the state of the infrastructure of both the sectors would be infelicitous
Also, we don't the distribution of these deaths, for example of all the 200 death in-flight accident occurred due to just one accident or one crash out of hundreds of flights thus having information on the nature of deaths and accidents of both the sector would help in making bolstering or weakening the conclusion
The argument informs us that pilots are less likely to be in an accident, four times less likely than average to have accidents on the road, this study lacks the data of the competency of both the sectors, what if the pilots use in the study are of top class and drivers are use of below mediocre, this would seriously qualify the conclusion if the drivers and pilots used are not of comparable skills in their respective domain
The argument made a series of unstated assumptions and If anyone of the suppositions contained in the argument proved false, the conclusion would be factually wrong
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 6 15
No. of Words: 338 350
No. of Characters: 1686 1500
No. of Different Words: 180 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.288 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.988 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.788 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 124 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 92 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 56.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 28.912 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.833 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.475 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.475 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.226 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 106, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...a smaller number of accidents annually. however, the argument makes a series of unsolic...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 317, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...f both the sectors would be infelicitous Also, we dont the distribution of these ...
^^^
Line 4, column 10, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ectors would be infelicitous Also, we dont the distribution of these deaths, for e...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, look, so, thus, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1714.0 2260.96107784 76% => OK
No of words: 337.0 441.139720559 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08605341246 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28457229495 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81377621661 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.53115727003 0.468620217663 113% => OK
syllable_count: 540.0 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 4.0 19.7664670659 20% => 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: 84.0 22.8473053892 368% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 452.112472179 57.8364921388 782% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 428.5 119.503703932 359% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 84.25 23.324526521 361% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 18.75 5.70786347227 328% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 8.20758483034 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.22566220032 0.218282227539 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.14166916176 0.0743258471296 191% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.113140648246 0.0701772020484 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0948295535154 0.128457276422 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0990490623422 0.0628817314937 158% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 44.7 14.3799401198 311% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: -13.78 48.3550499002 -28% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 14.6 7.1628742515 204% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 36.0 12.197005988 295% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 13.43 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.32 8.32208582834 136% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 35.6 11.1389221557 320% => Gunning_fog is high.
text_standard: 36.0 11.9071856287 302% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.