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 questions would need to be addressed in order to decide whether the conclusion and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to the questions would help to evaluate the conclusion.
According to the prompt, the author states that, there is 30% increase in consumption of sea food dishes in Bay City restaurents over duration of five years. Yet there are no restaurents whose speciality is seafood. Additionally, the families with two income eat significantly fewer home cooked food as they did a decaeds ago. Thus the author concludes that, the new Captain Seafood restaurent which has speciality in seafood will be quite popular and profitable. At first glance, this argument might seem true, but after scrutinising, th argument relies on several unwarranted assumptions and flaws, without bolstering those assumprions the conclusion cannot be validated.
To start with, according to the prompt, there is 30% increase in consumption of sea food dishes in Bay City restaurents the past five years. On what basis the study was proposed and what were the specifications included? These quesions need to be answered. The specifications such as number of partisipants which were involved in the sudy and the sureity that the information procided is 100% true needs to be evaluated. Additionally, the number provided(30%) is just a game to coax thr viewers as 30% increse might have several meanings as, 30% increase of 100 is 130 and 10000 is 13000, increase in number is significantly diffrent(30 to 3000). Thus we cannot rely on such kind of statements provided by ambiguious sales study.
Additionally, was there any survey or some kind of research conducted before stating, there are no city restaurents whose speciality is seafood? If this was so, then what was the reson behind this, was there any specific anamoly in the system to provide the prime quality of seafood or there was no specific consumers for seafood? All these questions need to be answered before validating the conclusion.
Finally, the author concludes that, the new Captain Seafood restaurent which has speciality in seafood will be quite popular and profitable. We cannot rely on such kind of ambigious concluiosn as it relies on several unwarranted assumptions. If the quality of seafood provided by the restaurent was poor , such kind of reataurent cannot be termed as popular. Even the flavours, style and taste of cooking matters the most as the locas would like diffrent flavoure than the restaurent offers then restaurent cannot sustanin in thet locality.
In conclusion, as of now, the argument relies on several unwarranted and ambigious assumpetions and statements. Without any irrfrutables proofs, perhaps in a form of systematic study, the vialibility of the argument cannot be assured.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 31 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 415 350
No. of Characters: 2114 1500
No. of Different Words: 198 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.513 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.094 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.904 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 153 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 122 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 88 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.75 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.123 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.302 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.516 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.063 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 328, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... cooked food as they did a decaeds ago. Thus the author concludes that, the new Capt...
^^^^
Line 3, column 644, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...er is significantly diffrent30 to 3000. Thus we cannot rely on such kind of statemen...
^^^^
Line 7, column 172, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ofitable. We cannot rely on such kind of ambigious concluiosn as it relies on sev...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 308, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...food provided by the restaurent was poor , such kind of reataurent cannot be terme...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, so, then, thus, in conclusion, kind of, such as, to start with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2181.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 415.0 441.139720559 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25542168675 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51348521516 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97975226914 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 204.123752495 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.493975903614 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 662.4 705.55239521 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.239895315 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.05 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.75 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.35 5.70786347227 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.262634331821 0.218282227539 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0884441412321 0.0743258471296 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.108403935933 0.0701772020484 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138771215307 0.128457276422 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0796306579964 0.0628817314937 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 14.3799401198 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.