In a study of the reading habits of Waymarsh citizens conducted by the University of Waymarsh, most respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a second study conducted by the same researchers found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Waymarsh was the mystery novel. Therefore, it can be concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading preferences.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The argument concludes that since the last survey conducted by the University of Milan reported a different result from the first one, then it must be the case that citizens have not revealed their preferences during the first interview. However, the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation, in addition it fails to mention several factors on which the conclusion should be evaluated. Hence, the argument is flaw and unconvincing.
The first implicit assumption which has been made by the argument is that the pool of subjects of the two surveys has been the same. Nonetheless, the argument does not mention any information about the subject pool. Indeed, it could be the case that those who have participated in the first survey were different people of the second study. In this case, difference in preferences are not due to a misrepresentation but maybe they are just due to the fact that different people have actually different reading habits. Moreover, the second unstated assumption on which the argument relies is that the two surveys have been conducted with a short time difference between them which justifies the conclusion. In fact, if the surveys would have been conducted with the same people and with a short time period between them, then the conclusion would have been much more cogent. However, if the first survey has been done decades before the second one, the different results can be explained by a shift in preferences which has occurred over time.
Additionally, the argument readily assumes the equivalence between the books that people checked out at a public library and those that people actually pay for at the book store. This equivalence is not necessarily true. Indeed, it could be the case that people prefer to borrow from the public library mystery novels and, at the same time,to buy literary classics at the bookstore. In different words, the argument assumes that the consumption habit of people does not change when the good which is purchased is free: this is unlikely true. The opposite is more common. Even if we assume that the subjects interviewed have been the same the two times, it might be that they do not want to spend money for buying mystery novels, but they are ready to do so for literary classics. Finally, the argument does not mention the entity of the two surveys. It does not mention the percentage of people out of the first study who preferred literary classics and it did not do so neither for the second study. This could have been extremely helpful in order to compare the two results and in order to assess how strong were the two results obtained.
In conclusion, the argument would have been more cogent if it has stated the above-mentioned evidences. In order to assess the validity of a conclusion it is necessary to know all the relevant facts. Hence, the argument is still open to debate
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: 22 15
No. of Words: 493 350
No. of Characters: 2356 1500
No. of Different Words: 195 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.712 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.779 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.558 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 159 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 117 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 83 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.409 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.116 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.727 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.328 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.476 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.107 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 731, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had been'?
Suggestion: had been
...the conclusion. In fact, if the surveys would have been conducted with the same people and with...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 340, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , to
...ary mystery novels and, at the same time,to buy literary classics at the bookstore....
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, moreover, nonetheless, second, so, still, then, in addition, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 16.3942115768 159% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2414.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 492.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90650406504 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70967865282 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62673981323 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 204.123752495 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.420731707317 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 756.0 705.55239521 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.9088054795 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.727272727 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3636363636 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.31818181818 5.70786347227 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.114754861969 0.218282227539 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0318649684539 0.0743258471296 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0383171793358 0.0701772020484 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0621868683355 0.128457276422 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0363011145601 0.0628817314937 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.52 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.