In the argument, the writer concludes that employers with the habit of fewer than 6 hours of sleep per night are efficient to flourish productivity. He comes to this assertion based on certain evidence including a recent study. Although the writer's contentment might ultimately prove valid, As it stands now, the argument rests on three unwarranted assumptions that significantly hinder its credibility.
First of all, the author assumes that the 300 males and females are the significant numbers of executives to draw this conclusion, but this might not be the case. Perhaps there may be more than 3 million executives and the sample size is much more lower than the exact sample population. In addition, it is possible that there are more advertising executives in the company as compared to other employees and draws conclusions only based on the executive's information. If either scenario above proves true, then the author's people with argument that than 6 hours of sleep are more productive does not hold water.
Moreover, the author assumes that the respondents give exact information about their sleeping time, but this might not be the case. Perhaps there may be some respondents who do not exactly remember their sleeping time and give information just to be a participant in the study. In addition, there may be a range of sleeping time not the exact time of sleep. If it is true that the information provided by respondents is not true, then the author's contention is significantly tempered.
Finally, the author makes an assumption that there is a causal relationship between the number of sleeping hours per night and the productivity of employees, but this might not be true. Perhaps there are lots of factors including physical factors responsible to increase productivity and work efficiency. Only sleeping hours might not be a factor to enhance the profit of a business. If it is true, then the writer's assertion is significantly tempered.
To conclude, although the central claim of the writer might hold water, indicating there is a connection between the amounts of sleep the employees need and the prosperity of firms, the writer needs to consider the above three alternative explanations if he hopes to bolster persuasiveness. The author should provide the exact sample population as well as the reliability of the study.
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: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 383 350
No. of Characters: 1929 1500
No. of Different Words: 174 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.424 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.037 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.887 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 125 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 104 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 83 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.529 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.161 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.706 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.34 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.34 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.092 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 242, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
... including a recent study. Although the writers contentment might ultimately prove vali...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 243, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'lower' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: lower
... executives and the sample size is much more lower than the exact sample population. In ad...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 445, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'executives'' or 'executive's'?
Suggestion: executives'; executive's
...and draws conclusions only based on the executives information. If either scenario above p...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 439, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ed by respondents is not true, then the authors contention is significantly tempered. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 408, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
... of a business. If it is true, then the writers assertion is significantly tempered. T...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, if, may, moreover, so, then, well, in addition, as well as, first of all, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1966.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 383.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13315926893 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94163074601 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.456919060052 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 612.0 705.55239521 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.8446833053 57.8364921388 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.647058824 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5294117647 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.17647058824 5.70786347227 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.21040110496 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0684715258468 0.0743258471296 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0577690112025 0.0701772020484 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113470618018 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0318899625083 0.0628817314937 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 98.500998004 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.