The notion that employing people who sleep less would have higher profit may seem cogent at first glance. Because the study shows the performance of a worker with a shorter sleep would act better in some aspects. Notwithstand, this argument is filled up with assumptions and logical mistakes. Three reasons would suffice to support that idea.
To begin with, the arguer incorrectly assumes that the sleep with the same period provides the same outcome. Specifically, there are abundant evidence shows the deep sleep could bring more benefits and make people energetic. Therefore, it is equally possible that deep sleep takes a more significant place in making sure the extraordinary performing rather than sleep less. This factor may also act as a main cause of faster growth. Hence, the more evidence is needed to preclude that explanation.
Moreover, the arguer fails to claim that sleeping less would bring all good feedback. However, well performance is decided by many aspects. That survey only provides the evidence of higher profit margins and faster growth. At the same time,they may become more careless and less energetic. This approach would not bring too many benefits than assuming. The arguer is necessary to glean more information to make sure how they live going in all aspects rather than some specific ones.
Finally, even if the assumptions above are true, the arguer still fails to assume that all people sleep less could perform exceptionally. Individuals are different. Employing could not simply depend on the sleep time without concerning working skills and educational background. At the same time, a specific people who sleep less may not act as the assumption, performing normally or even worse. So judging employing by according sleep time only seems unfair.
To sum up, the argument is less cogent than seems, for the lack of evidence to support assumptions. In order to rule out other explanations, it is essential to collect more information.
The notion that employing people who sleep less would have higher profit may seem cogent at first glance. Because the study shows the performance of a worker with a shorter sleep would act better in some aspects. Notwithstand, this argument is filled up with assumptions and logical mistakes. Three reasons would suffice to support that idea.
To begin with, the arguer incorrectly assumes that the sleep with the same period provides the same outcome. Specifically, there are abundant evidence shows the deep sleep could bring more benefits and make people energetic. Therefore, it is equally possible that deep sleep takes a more significant place in making sure the extraordinary performing rather than sleep less. This factor may also act as a main cause of faster growth. Hence, the more evidence is needed to preclude that explanation.
Moreover, the arguer fails to claim that sleeping less would bring all good feedback. However, well performance is decided by many aspects. That survey only provides the evidence of higher profit margins and faster growth. At the same time,they may become more careless and less energetic. This approach would not bring too many benefits than assuming. The arguer is necessary to glean more information to make sure how they live going in all aspects rather than some specific ones.
Finally, even if the assumptions above are true, the arguer still fails to assume that all people sleep less could perform exceptionally. Individuals are different. Employing could not simply depend on the sleep time without concerning working skills and educational background. At the same time, a specific people who sleep less may not act as the assumption, performing normally or even worse. So judging employing by according sleep time only seems unfair.
To sum up, the argument is less cogent than seems, for the lack of evidence to support assumptions. In order to rule out other explanations, it is essential to collect more information.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 107, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” 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.
...profit may seem cogent at first glance. Because the study shows the performance of a wo...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 240, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , they
...gins and faster growth. At the same time,they may become more careless and less energ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, therefore, well, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.6327345309 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1675.0 2260.96107784 74% => OK
No of words: 319.0 441.139720559 72% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25078369906 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65944185284 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.53605015674 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 504.9 705.55239521 72% => 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: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 22.8473053892 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.8467285325 57.8364921388 53% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 76.1363636364 119.503703932 64% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.5 23.324526521 62% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.95454545455 5.70786347227 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => 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: 0.519550572775 0.218282227539 238% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136159528169 0.0743258471296 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.153299487837 0.0701772020484 218% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.302184403621 0.128457276422 235% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.276538598071 0.0628817314937 440% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 14.3799401198 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 48.3550499002 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 12.197005988 72% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.58 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 98.500998004 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 11.1389221557 68% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.