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 author provides two pieces of evidence in support of the researchers’ contention that workers without paid sick leave are more likely to work when ill, and that such workers are more likely to experience a job-related accident as a result. The results of the study cannot be disputed — we must accept as true, for example, that those with paid sick leave are significantly less likely to have work-related accidents than those without paid sick leave. We might, however, question whether the study was large enough, or representative enough, to draw broad conclusions. Further, the study does not demonstrate causation: it does not tie the incidence of work-related accidents to illness. While the researchers’ hypothesis is certainly one possibility, more research is needed to eliminate other possibilities and to bolster the strength of this argument.
The largest leap in the argument is the assumption that those without paid sick leave feel pressured to work when ill. No evidence is presented to establish this supposition. In order to strengthen this part of the argument, the researchers might ask study participants whether they have actually come to work ill during the same time frame covered by the original study and, if so, why they chose to come to work when ill. If the study participants who did experience a work-related accident were also more likely to come to work ill for fear of lack of pay, then the hypothesis would be much more strongly supported, particularly if this occurred with a correspondingly large proportion of workers (to match the 28% greater incidence of accidents in the original study).
The researchers would also strengthen their case by addressing alternate explanations for the data in the original study. For instance, are there differences between the two groups based upon industry or job performed that might explain the data? For example, are hourly workers more likely to lack paid sick leave,while salaried workers are more likely to receive it? Are hourly workers more likely to work in blue-collar or more manual occupations, where on-the-job accidents are more frequent? If so, then we would expect a correlation between unpaid sick leave and a higher incidence of workplace accidents because the work itself is inherently more dangerous, not because people are choosing to work when ill. Further, if it is the case that higher-risk occupations in general are more likely to lack paid leave, then the second piece of evidence also loses its significance. In such a case, the researchers’ hypothesis would be significantly weakened.
The data presented also lacks a depth of detail that would help us to evaluate the significance of the study results. How many people were surveyed? What is the margin of error and how was the study conducted? Is the 28% figure statistically significant? If the study represented a large enough survey group to extrapolate to the general population, across regions, industries, and job responsibilities, then the study results may be conveying something significant. If, alternatively, few people were surveyed or the incidence of job-related accidents were very low, then perhaps the 28% difference represented a small number of people, well within the statistical variance expected.
While the argument presents an interesting hypothesis, the data presented is not strong enough to establish the validity of the conclusion to even a small degree. First, at a basic level, we need to know whether the existing data is statistically significant and sufficiently representative. There are also several gaps in the logic chain, assertions made without supporting evidence. Finally, the researchers could strengthen their case by examining, and dismissing, alternate explanations for the data presented thus far.These steps might not be enough to establish the validity of the hypothesis beyond a doubt, but they would allow the researchers to determine whether the pursuit of the hypothesis is a good use of time, funds, and attention.
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 24 15
No. of Words: 642 350
No. of Characters: 3304 1500
No. of Different Words: 271 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.034 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.146 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.973 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 225 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 182 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 141 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 105 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.75 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 18.624 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.306 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.499 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.141 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 315, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , while
...kers more likely to lack paid sick leave,while salaried workers are more likely to rec...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 613, Rule ID: SMALL_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, use 'a few', or use 'some'
Suggestion: a few; some
... perhaps the 28% difference represented a small number of people, well within the statistical var...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 524, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: These
...nations for the data presented thus far.These steps might not be enough to establish ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, so, then, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, in general, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 77.0 55.5748502994 139% => OK
Nominalization: 28.0 16.3942115768 171% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3415.0 2260.96107784 151% => OK
No of words: 641.0 441.139720559 145% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.32761310452 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.0316973083 4.56307096286 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14111426805 2.78398813304 113% => OK
Unique words: 288.0 204.123752495 141% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.449297971919 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 1082.7 705.55239521 153% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.67365269461 358% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 82.767872451 57.8364921388 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.346153846 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6538461538 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.46153846154 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 16.0 6.88822355289 232% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.266942154613 0.218282227539 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0727999216319 0.0743258471296 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0772453531134 0.0701772020484 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156323808905 0.128457276422 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0908278436059 0.0628817314937 144% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 98.500998004 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.