The following editorial appeared in the Lamont Times newspaper During last year s election only 35 percent of people living in Lamont voted whereas in the nearby affluent town of Chiswick that number was 75 percent In a recent survey of young adults over

Essay topics:

The following editorial appeared in the Lamont Times newspaper.

"During last year’s election, only 35 percent of people living in Lamont voted, whereas in

the nearby affluent town of Chiswick, that number was 75 percent. In a recent survey of

young adults, over 80 percent of respondents in Chiswick reported frequently using their

mobile devices to access social media sites. However, in Lamont, only 60 percent of

young adults who own mobile devices reported accessing their social media accounts on a

regular basis. The survey also revealed that young adults in both towns who use social

media at least once a day are more likely to consider themselves knowledgeable about

current political and social issues, which is considered a key characteristic of those who

vote. Clearly, the number of people who vote in elections is higher in Chiswick than in

Lamont because more of Chiswick’s young adults actively participate in social media."

Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could

rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account

for the facts presented in the argument.

The author of report has alleged that there is a direct relation between the percentage of checking social media and the percentage of voted people in an area. The argument provide some evidence and reasons for its reasoning which look cogent at the firat galnce, bt when we delve deepre into its reasoning, we could find several assumptions and holes. If all of which could be challenges could falls apart the argument. Thus, I could not accept the argument as it is for three reason and the writer should provide more persuasive information to make the argument more defencable.

First of all, the author compares the percentages of people who are checking social media from their mobile divices but he did not consider the number of people that may check social media from laptops or pc. As he said Chiswick is affluent town, it is possible that they have more modern mobile devices that have ability to check social media. But the other city, Lamont, may their people have not modern divices and some of them have to check their social media from their pc. If this is the case, the author should provide additional inforamtion about other people who use pc or other devices for checking social media.

Moreover, even if we accept the statement about checking social media, again we could not accept the argument because he just considered young adults and ignore other part of the society. Different cities have different age range that may involve in the election with different rate and consequently may affect on the thotal percentage of voting. If this is the case, author should consdier other age range in hs study and they also may use different media for awaring of current political and social news. In order to justify the argument, the author should clearly study different age ranges and different ways that may use to gain news.

Finally, the author faulty assumes that all people use social media for getting political news and soical event while it could not be fallacious. For instance people may use it for connceting with their friends and making date or like that. The author did not conside about othe rpossible usages of social media. In order to make the argument more persuasive, the author should conduct a survey on scientific conditions that could consider all of the possible events and eliminate the outier possiblities. Then, readers would accept the argument more easily.

To sum up, although the conclusion of the argument may correct, the author could not provide adequate inforamtion to persuade the readers. In order to justify the argume

Average: 5.8 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
This essay topic by users:
Post date Users Rates Content
2021-01-03 58 Read full essay
2020-10-16 gregregre 68 Read full essay
2020-09-25 Gauri 58 Read full essay
2020-09-10 jnp1999 73 Read full essay
2020-04-14 Sara refaat 60 Read full essay
Essays by the user:


Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 174, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'provides'.
Suggestion: provides
...f voted people in an area. The argument provide some evidence and reasons for its reaso...
Line 1, column 354, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...uld find several assumptions and holes. If all of which could be challenges could ...
Line 1, column 396, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'fall'
Suggestion: fall
... all of which could be challenges could falls apart the argument. Thus, I could not a...
Line 5, column 305, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'effect'?
Suggestion: effect
...ith different rate and consequently may affect on the thotal percentage of voting. If thi...
Line 7, column 441, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...ientific conditions that could consider all of the possible events and eliminate the outie...

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, if, look, may, moreover, so, then, thus, while, for instance, first of all, to sum up

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.6327345309 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2153.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 436.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9380733945 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56953094068 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.3698987583 2.78398813304 85% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.451834862385 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 676.8 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.8190167751 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.315789474 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9473684211 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.63157894737 5.70786347227 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0502698945661 0.218282227539 23% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0176152462147 0.0743258471296 24% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0201488915627 0.0701772020484 29% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0256531001792 0.128457276422 20% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0213812648107 0.0628817314937 34% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.06 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?

It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.

Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 22 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 436 350
No. of Characters: 2102 1500
No. of Different Words: 194 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.57 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.821 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.323 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 158 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 94 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 63 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.947 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.179 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.364 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.575 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.185 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5