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 author of the argument concludes that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading preferences. To buttress his argument, the author cites that the first study shows that most respondents prefer literary classics as reading material, while most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries was mystery novel. while it might be true that first study might be misrepresentative based on different results from two studies, we cannot fully evaluate the argument due to the some questionable stated and unstated assumptions.
To begin with, the difference in result of two studies does not mean that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading preferences based on survey results. For example, it is possible that most participants in the survey are students, who prefer literary classics to novel, while public libraries are used more by people aged above 25, who prefer reading novel for leisure. Following this way, the variance in two studies can be attributed to inconsistent types of population in samples. We also need to examine the credibility of two studies, in that the difference might be explained by questionable methods or procedures instead of misrepresentation. The sample size in first study has to be large enough to reduce bias while time periods in second study has to be long enough to view the pattern. Unless both studies are well-designed and controlled properly, it is overly simplistic to conclude.
When a disproportionately large number of students are in the survey, the result is perhaps distorted and not representative. Therefore, the variance in study might be resulted from uneven distribution of people from different age groups in the survey rather than from people's misrepresentation. In addition, it is also plausible that the sample size is too small to get the comprehensive ideas of people's opinions. Hence, increasing number of respondents would perhaps deflect the results. The time duration of second study is quite significant as well. One year total number of books checked out in individual section might be more useful than one month similar statistics.
Moreover, the author assumes that number of books checked out reveals the exact reflection of people's preferences. The choice or decision of books checked out might lies in many other factors, such as availability and usage. To illustrate, it is likely that libraries have much more collections of mystery novel than classics, then they have to choose other types of books to read when classics are not available. It is also plausible that library classics in most public libraries can only be read within the library, with only a few can be taken home. In this case, the low quantity of literary classics cannot be attributed to low interest in novel from public. Quite likely, students check out books for their academic paper or project rather than reading for their own interest.
Last but not least, the assumption that conditions in local libraries stand for all conditions in Waymarsh is ungrounded. If public library is the only method for the residents to obtain reading materials, then it is possible that people like to read novels more, supporting the misrepresentation in first study. On the other hand, it is likely that most people, who prefer classics, would buy these books from book store or online, so that they do not need to check these out anymore from the libraries. Unless we integrate reading materials from all medium, including online market, book stores and private and public libraries, we cannot fully draw the conclusion above.
To sum up, as it stands, the conclusion made by the author is based on incomplete or problematic assumptions that weaken the validity. To further strengthen his argument that respondents in the first study has misrepresented their reading preferences, the author should provide the evidences as follows: first, whether studies reading habits conducted by the University of Waymarsh are representative; second, the availabilities of both kinds of books in all public library as well as library policies; third, whether people get reading materials more frequently from other methods or platforms.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 676 350
No. of Characters: 3471 1500
No. of Different Words: 273 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.099 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.135 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.888 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 253 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 184 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 129 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 85 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.694 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.731 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.289 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.507 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.1 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 347, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: While
...the public libraries was mystery novel. while it might be true that first study might...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 508, Rule ID: THE_SOME_DAY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'same'?
Suggestion: same
... fully evaluate the argument due to the some questionable stated and unstated assump...
^^^^
Line 11, column 475, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
...th kinds of books in all public library as well as library policies; third, whether people...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, moreover, second, so, then, therefore, third, well, while, as to, for example, in addition, such as, as well as, to begin with, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 13.6137724551 162% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 28.8173652695 149% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 95.0 55.5748502994 171% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3558.0 2260.96107784 157% => OK
No of words: 676.0 441.139720559 153% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26331360947 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.09901951359 4.56307096286 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97673424168 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 292.0 204.123752495 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.431952662722 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1098.0 705.55239521 156% => 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: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.22255489022 237% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 72.6885797745 57.8364921388 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.777777778 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.037037037 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.85185185185 5.70786347227 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.251145677924 0.218282227539 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0679096890001 0.0743258471296 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0678906028026 0.0701772020484 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1444326116 0.128457276422 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0645190564091 0.0628817314937 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 152.0 98.500998004 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => 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.