In the preceding argument, the author states that the best remedy for insomnia as a chronic disease is the scant in lavender flowers. The conclusion is based on the following premises. Firstly, the author citing a study over 30 volunteers with chronic insomnia. Secondly, the 30 volunteers continued to take their medications for three weeks in controlling environment by using lavender scanted pillows. Hence, in the first glance it seem plausible. However, careful scrutiny sheds light on plethora of assumptions that could undermine the value of the argument.
T begin with, the argument readily states a study by citing 30 volunteers, but there are multifarious factors that remains elusive and intractable. Such as, firstly is the sample size representative for generalization on the whole people are suffering from insomnia, moreover, what about the demographic data, for instance, age, healthy lifestyle, social status, and type of foods they consumed. All these factors play major roles when represent a study. In other words, he fails to mention the controlling variables to conclude the assumption.
Second, even there is a positive and concrete relation between using lavender pillows and induce sleeping for longer time this does not necessarily indicate conspicuous relation between the two events. In other words, the author fails to mention How he concluded the results, how the strong relation is, For example why doctors do not use the pillow as curable remedy for insomnia instead the useless medications. So, building decision depends on weak relation is implausible.
Last but not least, the author fails to mention what type of controlling variables they used, perhaps some volunteer prefer calm with cool temperature in contrast some of them prefer different conditions, so how they controlled all these. Furthermore, are all the volunteers taking the same medications for insomnia in deed, there are uncountable number of medications with different actions and side effects for insomnia. Thus, without ruling out all the possible questions about this flower, the author fails again to support the situation.
In conclusion, the argument fails to mention one key factor. Namely, the relation between using the lavender pillows and the soporific effect was equivocal. So, without complete information the argument unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Essay evaluation report
sample:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/folk-remedy-insomn…
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 366 350
No. of Characters: 1951 1500
No. of Different Words: 204 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.374 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.331 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.773 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 156 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 124 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 86 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.263 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.899 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.789 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.526 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.062 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 435, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'seems'?
Suggestion: seems
... pillows. Hence, in the first glance it seem plausible. However, careful scrutiny sh...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, thus, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast, such as, in other words, on the whole
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 12.9520958084 8% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2017.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 366.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.51092896175 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37391431897 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86351963365 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579234972678 0.468620217663 124% => OK
syllable_count: 618.3 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 63.4120325536 57.8364921388 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.157894737 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2631578947 23.324526521 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.68421052632 5.70786347227 170% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.269967655489 0.218282227539 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0745884237064 0.0743258471296 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0820577411767 0.0701772020484 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143113485387 0.128457276422 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0749235848559 0.0628817314937 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.