The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company.
"According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actually increased during the past year. Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation,
The argument is well presented and appears relatively sound at first glance. The proposed solution sounds prudent. However on evaluating the solution and on closer examination by shedding light on more facts and presenting certain unanswered questions , it is easy to infer that the argument is based on fallacious assumptions and commits a false analogy. The author claims that fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies this year as the contents of the positive reviews are not reaching a wide audience and hence a greater share of its budget needs to be allocated for advertising.
The author does not indicate the percentage of movies for which the reviews were good. He just states that the percentage of positive reviews increased last year for specific movies. In order to strengthen the argument, the author needs to present the percentage of movies for which the reviews are good. It can be the case that the reviews were good only for two or three out of ten movies last year which are very low figures for a production company. However, the argument can be strengthened if a higher percentage of movies actually received positive reviews.
The author also does not indicate the the percentage of how much the positive reviews have increased from the previous year or the percentage of positive revies last year. Suppose, the previous year was only able to muster only twenty to twenty five percent positive reviews and this year the percentage has risen to thirty, it is not a very big leap. The number of negative reviews still outnumber the number of positive reviews. Exact figures need to be preented to strengthen the argument and to provide a better basis for the assumptions
The genre of the movies is not taken into account. For instance the Super Screen Movie company focusses on archaic themes that today's general public are not interested in. These movies might receive good reviews by the viewers watching them but the themes are not appreciated by the public.
Other external factors such as the number of cinema theaters and the quality of cinema theaters where the movie is presented in are not explored. The movie might not be telecasted in the best theaters of the city and this will severly impact viewership. Research has shown that not everyone attends cinemas for the quality of the movie but for the asthetics, features and options available in the movie theater. Young parents might require a play area to leave their kids for a while during the duration of the film. Some people would like good quality popcorn. These factors also play a part on deciding the movie theater. No proof is provided that the movie is displayed in all the cinema theaters in the city.
While the argument presents an interesting hypothesis, the data presented is not strong enough to establish the validity of the conclusion. Furthermore the origin, validity and the depth of the survey was not provided. The number of people surveyed for one film, where the people were surveyed, the percentage of the people who have reviewed the film after watching the film are unanswered. The researcher can strengthen his/her claim by answering the questions presented in the essay and by dismissing and by but the argument as it stands is incomplete.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 11 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 550 350
No. of Characters: 2672 1500
No. of Different Words: 240 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.843 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.858 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.494 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 201 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 151 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.37 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.837 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.556 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.281 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.534 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.113 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The author claims that the best way for ...
^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d white statement is very simplistic. Instilling cooperation from a young age ...
^^
Line 2, column 100, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...oom the next generation to work together , work with harmony and work towards a co...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... the progress of the team as a whole. Competition helps us to pick the best ca...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...are better for the country as a whole. A right balance between cooperation and ...
^^
Line 4, column 372, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e bad team players. These people are not To recapitulate, the best way for a soci...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, may, so, still
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.4196629213 24% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 12.9106741573 178% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2059.0 2235.4752809 92% => OK
No of words: 432.0 442.535393258 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.7662037037 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55901411391 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81817090843 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 215.323595506 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.472222222222 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 640.8 704.065955056 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.38483146067 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.192702943 60.3974514979 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.0476190476 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5714285714 23.4991977007 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.42857142857 5.21951772744 27% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.285811942293 0.243740707755 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0780713835598 0.0831039109588 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111414686135 0.0758088955206 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.189927393774 0.150359130593 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106250370054 0.0667264976115 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.1392134831 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.39 12.1639044944 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.77 8.38706741573 93% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 100.480337079 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.