Several recent studies have shown a link between health and stair usage. One recently completed study shows that people who live in stairs-only apartment buildings (that is, buildings without elevators) live an average of three years longer than do people who live in buildings with both elevators and stairs. A second study shows that elderly residents of buildings with elevators make, on average, twice as many visits to doctors each year as do residents of buildings without elevators. Furthermore, several doctor's offices are reporting that residents of stairs-only buildings scored higher than average on questionnaires administered to new patients, in which the patients were asked to rate several aspects of their own health (e.g., fitness, sleep quality, susceptibility to injury, etc.). The clearest explanation for these findings is that the moderate daily exercise required of residents who must use the stairs instead of elevators increases people's health and longevity.
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
The author asserts that people who live in stairs-only apartments lead a healthy lifestyle than those who live in buildings with both elevators and stairs. To support his conclusion, the author cites findings from a couple of studies that are in favor of the conclusions. Though convincing at first glance, upon further contemplation, one would easily come up alternate explanation that would refute the author's point of argument.
To begin with, the author fallaciously assumes that the people who live in buildings with both elevators and stairs do not use stairs at all. Futhermore, he assumes that these people do not perform no more any other physical exercise than the people who live in stairs-only apartments. However, these assumptions are a facial; inasmuch as the author does not provide any other detials about the lifestyle of the two groups of people under consideration. It need not be the case that people in buildings with both stairs and elevators use only the elevators. With widespread knowledge of the benefits of physical activity on health, there can be people who prefer to use stairs over elevators. Moreover, it is also very likely that people engage in some form of physical exercise not only to keep their mind and body healthy but also to have fun and socialize with the surrounding community. If either of the alternate explanations hold merit, then the author's conclusion is immature and dubious.
Secondly, the author claims that people living in buildings with both stairs and elevators visit twice as much as the people living in stairs-only builings. The author blatantly attributes this trend to the physical activity that one would have in using stairs. However, what if the people in the buildings with both stairs and elevators are more wealthy than those living in stairs-only apartments? The affluent dwellers of buildings with both stairs and elevators can afford to make frequent visits to doctors and hence, it is verly likely that due to this reason, their rate of visiting doctors is twice as compared to the others under consideration. Therefore, the author's claim that people living in stairs-only buildings make less visits to the doctors as compared others under consideratoin will not hold true if the above explanation is true.
Finally, the author aurgues that the people dwelling in stairs-only apartment tend to rate themselves better than the average on a questionarre that asks to rate several aspects of their health. The very procedure for asking them to rate themselves outrageously suggests that the results reflect the own perspective of the repondants and are not backed by a scientific study or laboratory test. It could very well be that case that the poeple living stairs-only buildings tend to rate themselver higher than their actaul state of health inadvertently. Or, the quetionarrie was give to less number of people living in stairs-only buildings and those vert few people rated themselves high. Hence, one can argue that there is a possibility for people living in stairs-only buildings have higher than average scores as they are rating themselves based on their knowledge and not based on any thorough examination by an expert.
All in all, we can see that there are alternate explanations for the finding that the author prematurely proponents and the arugment, as it stands, is unpersuasive as long as the author does not provide evidence that can rule out the above stated alternate explanations.
Comments
e-rater score report
Sentence: However, these assumptions are a facial; inasmuch as the author does not provide any other detials about the lifestyle of the two groups of people under consideration.
Error: detials Suggestion: details
Sentence: Secondly, the author claims that people living in buildings with both stairs and elevators visit twice as much as the people living in stairs-only builings.
Error: stairs-only Suggestion: stairs only
Error: builings Suggestion: buildings
Sentence: However, what if the people in the buildings with both stairs and elevators are more wealthy than those living in stairs-only apartments?
Error: stairs-only Suggestion: stairs only
Sentence: The affluent dwellers of buildings with both stairs and elevators can afford to make frequent visits to doctors and hence, it is verly likely that due to this reason, their rate of visiting doctors is twice as compared to the others under consideration.
Error: verly Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: Therefore, the author's claim that people living in stairs-only buildings make less visits to the doctors as compared others under consideratoin will not hold true if the above explanation is true.
Error: stairs-only Suggestion: stairs only
Error: consideratoin Suggestion: consideration
Sentence: Finally, the author aurgues that the people dwelling in stairs-only apartment tend to rate themselves better than the average on a questionarre that asks to rate several aspects of their health.
Error: stairs-only Suggestion: stairs only
Error: questionarre Suggestion: questionable
Error: aurgues Suggestion: argues
Sentence: The very procedure for asking them to rate themselves outrageously suggests that the results reflect the own perspective of the repondants and are not backed by a scientific study or laboratory test.
Error: repondants Suggestion: respondents
Sentence: It could very well be that case that the poeple living stairs-only buildings tend to rate themselver higher than their actaul state of health inadvertently.
Error: stairs-only Suggestion: stairs only
Error: actaul Suggestion: actual
Error: poeple Suggestion: people
Error: themselver Suggestion: themselves
Sentence: Or, the quetionarrie was give to less number of people living in stairs-only buildings and those vert few people rated themselves high.
Error: stairs-only Suggestion: stairs only
Error: quetionarrie Suggestion: questionable
Error: vert Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: Hence, one can argue that there is a possibility for people living in stairs-only buildings have higher than average scores as they are rating themselves based on their knowledge and not based on any thorough examination by an expert.
Error: stairs-only Suggestion: stairs only
Sentence: All in all, we can see that there are alternate explanations for the finding that the author prematurely proponents and the arugment, as it stands, is unpersuasive as long as the author does not provide evidence that can rule out the above stated alternate explanations.
Error: unpersuasive Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: arugment Suggestion: argument
-------------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 567 350
No. of Characters: 2866 1500
No. of Different Words: 238 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.88 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.055 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.73 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 215 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 139 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 111 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 81 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.874 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.571 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.391 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.573 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.156 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 953, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...rnate explanations hold merit, then the authors conclusion is immature and dubious. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 733, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun visits is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...le living in stairs-only buildings make less visits to the doctors as compared other...
^^^^
Line 8, column 644, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this vert' or ''?
Suggestion: this vert;
...ple living in stairs-only buildings and those vert few people rated themselves high. Hence...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 25.0 13.6137724551 184% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 28.8173652695 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 76.0 55.5748502994 137% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2923.0 2260.96107784 129% => OK
No of words: 567.0 441.139720559 129% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15520282187 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87972968509 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8012840419 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 204.123752495 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.428571428571 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 909.0 705.55239521 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => 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: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.4494946749 57.8364921388 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.19047619 119.503703932 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0 23.324526521 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.47619047619 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.396419283063 0.218282227539 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.149295992106 0.0743258471296 201% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.113566062129 0.0701772020484 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.220878027932 0.128457276422 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.111657334397 0.0628817314937 178% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.3799401198 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 98.500998004 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.