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 argument states that seafood consumption in Bay City restaurants has gone higher in the past five years, so the new Captain Seafood restaurant should me welcomed well and make good profit. Lack of other seafood-specialized restaurants has been presented to support this argument. The habit of eating out yet healthy exercised by two-income families are also presented as an evidence behind the argument. However, the reasoning behind the argument is very faulty and weak, making the conclusion far-fetched, due to lack of three specific evidences.
Firstly, the author assumes that the consumption of seafood dishes has increased without regarding the issue of increasing population. More people means more consumers available in the market who might be eager to rececive the service. If previouly 100 people consumed seafood and now the number has risen upto 130, on account of increasing population in the city, the 30% increase stated in the passage does not indicate any significant variable other than increase in population. No population consensus has been presented to rule out the possibility of increased seafood consumption simply resulting from increasing number of customers. There is no evidence that states that the consumption rate was calculated with proper consideration of population growth. The statistics presented in the prompt might be invalid, weakening the prompt as it does not take the effect of increasing population into account.
Secondly, the seafood served in Bay City restaurants are assumed to be the only healthy food the two-income families can avail. In other words, such families inclination towards eating healthy food does not necessarily mean they want to consume seafood. There are many other dishes considered healthy- containing vegetables, fishes, useful fat and lean meat, which are also served in many restaurants. No evidence presents that people in general consider seafood as their only option of healthy food. To attribute this research to the conclusion made in the prompt provided does not seem germane at all.
Finally, the proclivity of people towards seafood is presented as the only evidence to state that the new Captain Seafood restaurant should conduct profitable business. This is not the only factor that determined whether some restaurant will thrive or not, taste, quality, service, price, location - all of these are vital factors that contributes to the popularization of a food place. If the restaurant is located in a remote area, it will not have enough customers even if the food is good. Even if the food is cheap, people will not get food from a place that is known to serve day-old foods. To consider only one parameter in determining a restaurants success in the future weakens the argument to a great extent.
The lack of evidences presented above show that the argument presented is fundamentally flawed. If evidences regarding people's choice of food, the price etc parameters were presented that would provide more strength to the prompt. So more evidences should be gathered before ruling the establishment of the new Captain Seafood restaurant as a successful future endeavour.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 12 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 503 350
No. of Characters: 2621 1500
No. of Different Words: 246 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.736 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.211 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.828 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 207 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 157 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 111 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 79 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.87 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.469 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.652 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.307 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.528 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.085 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 150, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'families'' or 'family's'?
Suggestion: families'; family's
...amilies can avail. In other words, such families inclination towards eating healthy food...
^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 646, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'restaurants'' or 'restaurant's'?
Suggestion: restaurants'; restaurant's
...der only one parameter in determining a restaurants success in the future weakens the argum...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, well, in general, in other words, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2686.0 2260.96107784 119% => OK
No of words: 503.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33996023857 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73578520332 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88005583146 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 253.0 204.123752495 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.502982107356 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 837.0 705.55239521 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.4603962644 57.8364921388 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.782608696 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8695652174 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.78260869565 5.70786347227 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 8.20758483034 207% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.231645621494 0.218282227539 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0701877474392 0.0743258471296 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0718610061305 0.0701772020484 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126503509474 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0506240345455 0.0628817314937 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.5979740519 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 98.500998004 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.