The following appeared as part of an article in a business magazine.
"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."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The prompt’s author argues that firms should only hire people who need less than six hours of sleep per night if they want their businesses to prosper. The author bases this argument on a recent study of Mentian advertising executives, as it found that executives who reported needing less than six hours of sleep had higher profit margins and faster growth. While the author may be well-intentioned, his/her argument is overall flawed as it is based on three unwarranted assumptions.
To begin, the author assumes that the recent study’s results are generalizable to all businesses and their employees. However, it is not clear if this is so. For instance, it is possible that only young advertising executives were included in the survey. Indeed, the results may have been vastly different if middle-aged adults or seniors were included in the study. Similarly, the results may have limited generalizability as only advertising executives were surveyed. Perhaps, executives in other fields sleep far more than six hours. Moreover, besides these issues with the nature of the sample, there also may be an issue with the sample size. Given the myriad number of people employed in business, the study’s 300 participants is a miniscule number. Hence, considering these various issues with the sample’s nature, it is perhaps unlikely that the author’s argument holds water for all personnel employed in businesses.
Secondly, the author bases his argument on the average number of hours slept in the sample. Hence, he/she assumes that average are valid means to make recommendations. Yet, this may not be the case here. It is possible that the average number of hours slept has been significantly influenced by outliers. For instance, there may be some executives who sleep ten hours and some who sleep two. These individuals may be performing at their potential with these hours of sleep. If the author’s recommendation of six hours were forced on them, then it is possible their individual productivity and their firm’s growth rate would be severely damaged.
Moreover, the author assumes six hours of sleep is the only contributing factor to firms’ success levels (i.e. high profit margins and growth rate). However, there may be several other factors that can account for this. That is, it is possible that the executives who worked at the most thriving firms shared other key characteristics that contributed to their firms’ success. For instance, these people may have the same education level. Perhaps, they have all earned MBAs from prestigious business schools. Another potential factor could be the myriad years of experience these individuals have. Given that these potential explanations may be contributing factors to firms’ success, the author’s argument does not hold water.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands now is a weak one as it rests upon three spurious assumptions. However, if the author can provide sufficient evidence regarding these matters, it may be possible to better assess the strength of his/her position.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 28 15
No. of Words: 491 350
No. of Characters: 2487 1500
No. of Different Words: 222 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.707 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.065 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.726 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 178 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 127 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 88 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.536 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.322 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.295 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.462 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.112 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 8, column 727, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... author’s argument does not hold water. In conclusion, the argument as it stands...
^^^^^
Line 10, column 255, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ssess the strength of his/her position.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, hence, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, similarly, so, then, well, while, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 52.0 28.8173652695 180% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2590.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 488.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.30737704918 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85846773856 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.475409836066 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 783.0 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 4.96107784431 262% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 19.7664670659 142% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.1125260221 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.5 119.503703932 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4285714286 23.324526521 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.17857142857 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.67664670659 278% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.168599982748 0.218282227539 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0489039524238 0.0743258471296 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0496944123508 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0967949539386 0.128457276422 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0615261124768 0.0628817314937 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.22 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 98.500998004 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => 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.