The argument claims, based on the discrepancy, that the citizens misrepresented their reading habits. In doing so, it fails to pay heed to the fallacies and jumps to the conclusion. A brief scrutiny of each of the fallacy is done below.
Firstly, the author supports his/her argument with some studies. However, he/she fails to provide data pertaining to the studies. The details of the studies such as the demography of the area is missing which is pivotal before asserting anything about the reading habits of people. There could be a stark possibility that the survey encompassed only a particular age group or region. Additionally, we are still in darkness, whether the surveys or studies conducted employed similar statistical methods. So it is important to know more about the studies, which is missing from the argument.
Secondly, assuming that the two studies were conducted in a similar fashion, the time frame in which they were conducted is not mentioned. If the studies were conducted during different times they would yield different results. For example, Mr. X loves to read literary classics, this does not warrant that Mr. X will always read literary classics throughout his/her life. Having said that, it is quiet possible that when the second study was conducted Mr. X was spending time with mystery novel. Thus, it is of stark importance to know about the time frame during which the studies were conducted.
Lastly, even if we assume that we are provided with all the above mentioned data, it still does't necessitate that the citizens were misrepresenting their habits. For example, it could be possible that the citizens sourced their literary classics from other sources such as internet or borrowing from a peer and source their mystery novels from public libraries resulting in high number of checkouts. Even if we ignore all the fallacies and dearth of information, the argument still commits a logical error and reaches an erroneous conclusion.
To sum up, the argument is logically fallacious and fails to provided important data. The argument can be strengthened by addressing the above mentioned issue.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 351 350
No. of Characters: 1741 1500
No. of Different Words: 182 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.328 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.96 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.656 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 126 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 104 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 69 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 41 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.474 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.022 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.789 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.309 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.553 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.126 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 56, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a similar fashion" with adverb for "similar"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ing that the two studies were conducted in a similar fashion, the time frame in which they were cond...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 140, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...h they were conducted is not mentioned. If the studies were conducted during diffe...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, still, then, thus, for example, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => 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: 1798.0 2260.96107784 80% => OK
No of words: 347.0 441.139720559 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.18155619597 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31600926901 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74078703319 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.530259365994 0.468620217663 113% => OK
syllable_count: 542.7 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.0501221763 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.6315789474 119.503703932 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2631578947 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.73684210526 5.70786347227 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
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: 0.203684009343 0.218282227539 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0563220942972 0.0743258471296 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0608041954056 0.0701772020484 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0909295306497 0.128457276422 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0871470501193 0.0628817314937 139% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.3799401198 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 98.500998004 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.