The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants.
"Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. Only about 2 percent of customers have complained, indicating that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have reported that a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. Clearly, either these customers cannot distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine. Thus, we predict that Happy Pancake House will be able to increase profits dramatically if we extend this cost-saving change to all our restaurants in the southeast and northeast as well."
The given argument, albeit sounds logical, has many hidden flaws. By throwing more light on the issue, it is easy to see that the argument suffers several grave fallacies in its assumption as well as commits a false analogy. In addition, the argument is much weakened by the fact it does not consider the inherent differences between butter and margarine. Before any final decisions could be taken, much work is left for the arguer to make his/ her argument more logical and cogent.
Firstly, the argument states that butter has been replaced by margarine in happy pancake house restaurants throughout the southwestern United states in which only about 2 percent of customers have filed a formal complaint, indicating that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. The use of statistics is a shaky way of bolstering the logic behind the argument. The true value of the percentage could be predicted only if the number of complaints registered are known. For example, if there are 100 customers to the restaurant whereas only 10 members have filed the complaint will not lead to a correct prediction. How can we be sure that the remaining 90 customers were happy and that they do not have any complaints?
Secondly, it is stated that several customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. The reason could be many. they might not want to forsake the food just for the sake of butter or that they would not want to change restaurants assuming the change was made only on that day. Important decisions, however, cannot be made owing to the report made by the servers. A detailed study should be made indicating whether the same feedback was given by the same set of customers who were provided margarine instead of butter on a frequent basis.
Thirdly, the statement that either these customers cannot distinguish butter from margarine, or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine is clearly an amusing one. For instance, a regular customer to the restaurant might not know the difference, provided the replacement of butter with margarine had been concealed from them. Moreover, either a less educated person or a n individual not exposed to such foodstuffs alone might not know the difference. But, on the whole, this type of customers will be lesser than the other frequent customers.
thus, we can conclude by saying that, the decision to replace butter with margarine would not yield better profits as the conclusions predicted are not up to the required level of satisfaction. thus, in an attempt to avoid the expense of purchasing butter, the happy pancake house is making the biggest mistake of extending this cost-saving change to its restaurants throughout the rest of the country. In view of gaining profit, the restaurant is going to lose customers which in turn could lead to the fall of the company.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 492 350
No. of Characters: 2350 1500
No. of Different Words: 240 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.71 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.776 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.56 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 167 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 124 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 59 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.895 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.81 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.632 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.298 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.541 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.116 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 147, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: They
...rine instead. The reason could be many. they might not want to forsake the food just...
^^^^
Line 13, column 393, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...eover, either a less educated person or a n individual not exposed to such foodst...
^
Line 17, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Thus
...than the other frequent customers. thus, we can conclude by saying that, the de...
^^^^
Line 17, column 195, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Thus
... to the required level of satisfaction. thus, in an attempt to avoid the expense of ...
^^^^
Line 21, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d lead to the fall of the company.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, thus, well, whereas, for example, for instance, in addition, as well as, on the whole
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2431.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 492.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94105691057 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70967865282 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64360426298 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 250.0 204.123752495 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.508130081301 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 748.8 705.55239521 106% => 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: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.3274795303 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.761904762 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4285714286 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.95238095238 5.70786347227 139% => 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 : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.223616972485 0.218282227539 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0579700840101 0.0743258471296 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0898123343456 0.0701772020484 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120549554043 0.128457276422 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.10388206075 0.0628817314937 165% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.3799401198 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 98.500998004 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.