Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment.
Within that group of people, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots had not been wearing any protective clothing
(helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.). Clearly, the statistics indicate
that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, roller skaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident.
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 author of the argument concludes that according to statistics, people who participate in roller-skating should invest in premium-quality protection materials and better light-reflecting materials as it reduces the probability of being fatally injured in an accident. The author substantiates his position by quoting that according to statistics done by the healthcare, 75% of the highly injured roller skaters, who go to emergency room after facing an accident, are not wearing protective materials like helmets, knee pads, etc or light-reflecting materials like clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark, etc. The author of the argument
although presented little evidence, still the argument is flawed due to several unwarranted assumptions and the following unstated assumptions should be considered before evaluating the argument.
To begin, the author of the argument states out of blokes going to emergency room to get their roller skater accidents treated, 75 percent of the seriously injured rollers skaters do not have good protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) and naively assumes
lack of protective clothing is the reason for the cause of the tragedy. Perhaps, it may be the case that the automobile drivers in
the area are indifferent towards the traffic rules and keep on violating traffic rules. It can also be the case that implementation of traffic rules is not stringent and people ride without following traffic rules. Or there might be a chance that even if the roller skaters wear protective clothing, it may not decrease the fatality of accident as the automobile drivers drive very fast as the region has no speed limit. Therefore, without considering all the above assumptions, the argument
just becomes water under bridge.
Moreover, the author also attributes the severity of accidents to lack of light reflective equipment on skater rollers and claims that wearing light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.) would prevent the severity of the accident. What if, most of the roller skaters who go to emergency room for treatment, are getting injured in broad daylight? In such even cases, even if one uses many light-reflecting materials it will be of hardly any use. It can also be the situation where most of the accidents for skater rollers happen due to the callousness of the drivers but not skater rollers. It can also be the case, that most of the people living in that region hardly follow traffic rules due to lack of social knowledge and basic education. If any of the above assumptions is proven true, the argument will be weakened.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands now is ripe with several unstated assumptions and lack of solid proof to back the author's claims. If the author is able to provide more evidence, possibly in a systematic manner and consider and answer all the above-stated assumptions, it would be possible to correctly evaluate if using protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.) actually reduces the fatality of
the accidents.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 9 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 12 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 494 350
No. of Characters: 2564 1500
No. of Different Words: 217 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.714 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.19 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.944 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 203 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 155 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 108 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 70 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 30.875 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 17.142 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.812 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.368 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.542 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.099 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 10, column 169, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s that wearing light-reflecting material clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist p...
^^
Line 12, column 164, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...authors claims. If the author is able to provide more evidence, possibly in a sys...
^^
Line 12, column 198, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a systematic manner" with adverb for "systematic"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ble to provide more evidence, possibly in a systematic manner and consider and answer all the above-s...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 12, column 350, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ly evaluate if using protective clothing helmets, knee pads, etc. or any light-re...
^^
Line 12, column 492, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s, etc. actually reduces the fatality of the accidents.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, if, may, moreover, so, still, therefore, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 55.5748502994 121% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2638.0 2260.96107784 117% => OK
No of words: 491.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37270875764 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70728369723 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1009857186 2.78398813304 111% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458248472505 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 809.1 705.55239521 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.912352714 57.8364921388 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.9 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.55 23.324526521 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.75 5.70786347227 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 8.0 5.15768463074 155% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.88822355289 218% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.169617770261 0.218282227539 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0507014015704 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0578719094838 0.0701772020484 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0722175931065 0.128457276422 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0623863573084 0.0628817314937 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 14.3799401198 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.5979740519 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 98.500998004 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 12.3882235529 161% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.