A recent study by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention found that employees with paid sick leave
are 28 percent less likely to be involved in a work-related accident than employees who do not receive
payment for sick leave. Researchers hypothesize that employees with unpaid sick leave feel pressured to
work during time of illness for fear of lack of pay. On-the-job accidents are then spurred by impaired
judgment or motor skills due to illness or illness-related medications. The highest-risk occupations, such
as construction, showed the highest discrepancy between paid and unpaid leave.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to determine
whether the researchers’ hypothesis is reasonable. Be sure to explain what effects the answers to these
questions would have on the validity of the hypothesis.
The argument concludes on the basis of a hypothesis that workers who are paid for their sick leave are 28 percent less prone the accidents related to their occupation than those not paid for their work. The evidences cited to support this argument includes feeling pressure due to ill metal health, reduced judgmental ability during sickness of their body and work accidents related the construction are noticed more as compared to the other works. However the premises are unable to justify or strengthen the weak conclusion. The main reason why the argument is rendered inconclusive are incorrect assumption, problems with research data and ignoring certain other important factors.
Firstly, the argument incorrectly assumes that only non paid workers are having more chances of being parts of work accidents rather than the paid workers during their sickness. For example, it is not necessary that only non paid worker will have effect on their mental health during illness, other paid workers could also show mental weakness and are also prone to work accidents.
Secondly, the argument fails to consider other important factors which can affect the outcome of the argument in a different way. For instance only construction related works are having accidents and not the other occupations. People working in the business fields also have adverse effects on their mental well being, when they are not healthy and leads to brain hemorrhage and other fatal accidents.
Also, the statistical data provided may have fundamental loopholes and the sample taken during the survey may not accurately represent the data. There may be 10 or less than 10 percent people who are paid and prone to accidents rather than 28 percent as claimed in the argument.
Hence, it can be concluded that the argument's conclusion ill supported by the premises cited namely paid worker feel less pressure, inability to judge right or wrong, and that construction works have more accident. However, the argument can be bolstered by making correct assumptions, accurately taking the sample to make statistical data more appropriate and considering other occupation including construction works. In spite of the scope of improvement, argument as written is incoherent, illogical and completely inconclusive.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 360 350
No. of Characters: 1891 1500
No. of Different Words: 174 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.356 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.253 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.632 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 141 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 113 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.714 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.013 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.786 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.375 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.623 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.079 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 418, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[1]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...lated the construction are noticed more as compared to the other works. However th...
^^
Line 1, column 450, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...ed more as compared to the other works. However the premises are unable to justify or s...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 111, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a different way" with adverb for "different"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... can affect the outcome of the argument in a different way. For instance only construction related...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 37, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arguments'' or 'argument's'?
Suggestion: arguments'; argument's
... Hence, it can be concluded that the arguments conclusion ill supported by the premise...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, well, for example, for instance, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 55.5748502994 58% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1939.0 2260.96107784 86% => OK
No of words: 360.0 441.139720559 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38611111111 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35587717469 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7057879777 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.508333333333 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 597.6 705.55239521 85% => 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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.3470146463 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.5 119.503703932 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7142857143 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 5.70786347227 149% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 8.20758483034 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.202235343356 0.218282227539 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0763178331404 0.0743258471296 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0900137645205 0.0701772020484 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118416293732 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0673501693731 0.0628817314937 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 14.3799401198 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.87 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 98.500998004 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => 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.