The argument claims that today bicycle riders have a high awareness towards wearing safety helmet in comparison with the ten years ago. Stated in this way the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The argument's conclusion is based on presumptions for which there is no any conclusive evidence. As a result, the argument is weak, unpersuasive and riddled with errors.
First, the argument readily assumes that there is an increase in the number of people how wearing helmet today in comparison with the past based on the results of the first survey. This statement is a stretch and not substanshiated in any way. The author did not provide a specific data about the results such as when and where the data was collected, it may collected from other city or different type of people. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated if the data is from the same city or village which make a good sence for the reader to have a full picture about the accuracy of the results.
Second, the arguemnt claims that the majority of the riders feel more safe when they wear the helmet when they ride their bycyclies in the busy roads. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between how it will be more safe using only the helmet and the safety. However, there are enormous factors that contribute to the safety of the bicycles such as the breaks, the rusty steel and the wheels. If the argument had been provided statistical evidence about how the helmet make the bicycles safer then it could have been a lot more convincing.
Finally, the author stated today the riders take more risk, but there are many accidents everyday because of the uncommitment from the riders, so the author must provide more information about this statement.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the reasons stated above, thus unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the erlevant facts of the respondents and how they deal with their bicycles. It is necessary to have a complete knowledge of all contributing factors in order to evaluate the merits on a specific situation.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 382 350
No. of Characters: 1814 1500
No. of Different Words: 185 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.421 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.749 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.56 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 122 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 88 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 61 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.875 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.069 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.625 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.343 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.584 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.07 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 256, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arguments'' or 'argument's'?
Suggestion: arguments'; argument's
...sis of which it could be evaluated. The arguments conclusion is based on presumptions for...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 321, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...ased on presumptions for which there is no any conclusive evidence. As a result, t...
^^
Line 4, column 458, 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.
...breaks, the rusty steel and the wheels. If the argument had been provided statisti...
^^
Line 4, column 558, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
... how the helmet make the bicycles safer then it could have been a lot more convincin...
^^^^
Line 5, column 90, Rule ID: EVERYDAY_EVERY_DAY[3]
Message: 'Everyday' is an adjective. Did you mean 'every day'?
Suggestion: every day
...more risk, but there are many accidents everyday because of the uncommitment from the ri...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, so, then, thus, in conclusion, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1852.0 2260.96107784 82% => OK
No of words: 382.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.84816753927 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42095241839 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62683258791 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.497382198953 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 591.3 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.6599929677 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.75 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.875 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.125 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.122753688212 0.218282227539 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0416091893148 0.0743258471296 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0585911134363 0.0701772020484 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0644964629975 0.128457276422 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0443318953662 0.0628817314937 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.3799401198 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.15 12.5979740519 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.