A recent sales study indicates that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent during the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants whose specialty is seafood. Moreover, the majority of families in Bay City are two-income families, and a nationwide study has shown that such families eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals than they did a decade ago but at the same time express more concern about healthful eating. Therefore, the new Captain Seafood restaurant that specializes in seafood should be quite popular and profitable.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author of this paper makes a lot of assumption which is based on an undefined statistics and thus derives his conclusion that a seafood restaurant will be profitable and popular is flawed by the fact that the writer fails to analyze the reason why there haven’t been seafood restaurants. Is the paucity due to the fact that the people of Bay City prefer other sources of food or are they in an area where there is a limited supply of seafood product ?
The writer further assumes that since the people of Bay City are particular about healthy eating, this will automatically mean they would go for see food with any premise as to what other healthy sources of food are already available and what will be their preference upon the need for selection.
Although the writer’s claim that the seafood restaurant might have a case if the new seafood restaurant is only one and sells at an affordable rate within a robust menu this may not be very persuasive for the majority of households.
Additionally, the paper is flawed for many other cogent reasons not limited to the fact that the writer’s basis for a possible success in the seafood restaurant business is also built upon the fact that he/she expects that since a lot of families are two-income families and there has been a significant reduction in home-made food, hence this would allow for patronage by these families without corroborating this thought with fact and studies to identify the sustainability of these incomes with primary needs of these household and further confirming if there are other food alternatives such as office delivery, school cafeteria meal which could be very convenient.
All told, if the writer would have backed his/her claims with acute insight on the population type and food preferences of the people, the present income rate of the people and the affordability of the proposed food restaurant. Data on the sources of the present seafood consumption would put into perspective the writers claim and in turn build a very strong case.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 8 15
No. of Words: 347 350
No. of Characters: 1661 1500
No. of Different Words: 176 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.316 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.787 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.611 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 108 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 85 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 49 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 43.375 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 17.385 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.449 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.797 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.163 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 32, Rule ID: A_LOT_OF_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun assumption seems to be countable; consider using: 'a lot of assumptions'.
Suggestion: a lot of assumptions
The author of this paper makes a lot of assumption which is based on an undefined statisti...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 25, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had backed'?
Suggestion: had backed
...y convenient. All told, if the writer would have backed his/her claims with acute insight on th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, if, may, so, thus, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1713.0 2260.96107784 76% => OK
No of words: 344.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97965116279 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30665032142 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74619287365 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.514534883721 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 540.9 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 19.7664670659 35% => 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: 49.0 22.8473053892 214% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 166.409134365 57.8364921388 288% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 244.714285714 119.503703932 205% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 49.1428571429 23.324526521 211% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 6.57142857143 5.70786347227 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.130220529198 0.218282227539 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0740834836877 0.0743258471296 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0481551749226 0.0701772020484 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.083639743553 0.128457276422 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0531345547745 0.0628817314937 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 26.6 14.3799401198 185% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 21.74 48.3550499002 45% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.1628742515 181% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 22.4 12.197005988 184% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.49 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.69 8.32208582834 116% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 12.3882235529 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 21.6 11.1389221557 194% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.