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.”
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
Dr. Karp interviewed children in the island of Tertia and concluded that based on his study that Dr. Field’s observations are not valid. Furthermore, Dr. Karp goes on to say that the methods of Dr. Field (observations) are an invalid means of anthropological study as well and that his interviews are a more superior method in terms of accuracy. However, Dr. Karp’s statements should not be taken as fact before more evidence is put forth to corroborate his claims.
Firstly, Dr. Karp’s interviews are questionable. It is important to know what questions were asked during the interview. The children may have been prompted to speak about their parents. Just because they spoke more about their parents, it does not discount the possible fact that Dr. Field was correct in saying that the villegers spend more time raising them. In addition, what if the children’s parents were absent for most of their lives? Also, it would be important to know exactly how many children were interviewed as a small sample size in any study could not be representative of the entire population as a whole. If Karp interviews only five children, it is not reasonable to say that Dr. Field’s study has no merit.
Additionally, it is quite improbable that one bad observational study makes this entire method of study invalid as well. Even if Dr. Field’s study is proven to have no merit, it does not mean that other observational studies such as those about now accepted psychological and sociological theories based on observational studies about, for example, universal emotion recognition across several different cultures are invalid as well. Dr. Karp must consider this possibility before making such an extreme assumption that can be disproved by even just one case of an effective observational study.
Lastly, Dr. Karp says that his interview method is more accurate than Dr. Field’s observational studies. In order to evaluate this statement, we first need to know what aspects about the observational studies are different than those interview methods and whether or not the observational studies can get all of the information gathered in the interview anyways. Also, there could be ethical considerations such as permission restrictions and other weaknesses that could affect accuracy such as bias from both the graduate students conducting the interviews and the responses received from the children. The graduate students could force responses from the children which could compromise accuracy since the responses are not genuine. In fact, could the children leave out critical information that can only be obtained in the observational studies? If so, the interview method would not be more accurate.
In conclusion, since little evidence is given and since little is known about both of the archeologists’ studies, Dr. Karp’s statements need a lot more evidence to accept his claims of a more accurate study and claim of a faulty study by Dr. Field.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-21-outline
----------------------------
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: 20 15
No. of Words: 478 350
No. of Characters: 2425 1500
No. of Different Words: 212 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.676 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.073 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.854 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 159 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 130 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 96 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 62 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.9 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.644 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.347 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.549 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.147 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 392, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'several'.
Suggestion: several
...e, universal emotion recognition across several different cultures are invalid as well. Dr. Karp ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 229, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
...the observational studies are different than those interview methods and whether or ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 262, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...ferent than those interview methods and whether or not the observational studies can get all o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 311, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...r not the observational studies can get all of the information gathered in the interview a...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, anyway, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, lastly, may, so, well, for example, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2525.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 478.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28242677824 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67581127817 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0748590732 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.466527196653 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 776.7 705.55239521 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.0221028183 57.8364921388 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.25 119.503703932 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.8 5.70786347227 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.256413048307 0.218282227539 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0987471951051 0.0743258471296 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0871160665649 0.0701772020484 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.168452049336 0.128457276422 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0809993471855 0.0628817314937 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.3799401198 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 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.