Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. Recently another anthropologist, Dr. Karp, visited the group of islands that includes Tertia and used the interview-centered method to study child-rearing practices. In the interviews that Dr. Karp conducted with children living in this group of islands, the children spent much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. Dr. Karp decided that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture must be invalid. Some anthropologists recommend that to obtain accurate information on Tertian child-rearing practices, future research on the subject should be conducted via the interview-centered method.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The above given prompt calls into question the technique of study used by Dr. Field. A similiar study carried by Dr. Karp has been identified by anthropologists as the recommended technique for future studies related to Tertian child-rearing practices owning to its accuracy. The evidences provided for the accuracy of Dr. Karp's technique include, the comparison of Dr. Karp's technique with Dr. Field's technique, both studies having taken place 20 years apart. Secondly, since the findings of Dr. Karp and Dr. Field do not co-incide, Dr. Karp feels that Dr. Field's study must be invalid. Lastly, the anthropologists are of the opinion that interview-centered approach will provide accurate results. Howerver, a few questions need to be answered regarding the evidences provided to fully ascertain that interview-centered technique is the best route forward.
Firstly, do the children of present scenario and the children that were observed twenty-years ago similar in characteristics? Are the social and emotional characteristics of these two classes of children similar? If no, then it may be the case that children twenty-years ago were more socially outward and would mingle with other villagers. On the contrary, the children of current setup are possibly more socially reserved which is why they tend to be more close their parents. If such a paradox can be proved, it would mean that there was no fault in the technique that Dr. Field employed while studying the children of Tertia twenty-years ago.
Secondly, the basis on which Dr. Karp decided that Dr. Field's conclusion related to Tertian children is invalid is not present in the argument above. There could be possible reasons which could validate the technique used by Dr. Field to study Tertian children was accurate. It could perhaps be the case that there are flaws in the technique used by Dr. Karp which could possibly mean that the observation-centered technique of Dr. Field is more accurate in its approach.
Lastly, what are premises on which the anthropologists recommend that Dr Karp's technique is more accurate than Dr. Fields? There is no support to this statment anywhere in the prompt. It could be possible that the basis on which the comaprison was made by the anthropologists was not ideal. It is reflected in the passage as to how a two studies are being compared over a span of twenty years. Twenty years is a long span for demographics to change, as well as evolution of emotions to occur. The comparison is based on dis-similar data, taken from two different time periods. Perhaps, the technique used by Dr. Field was accurate twenty years ago. This could mean that the study of Dr. Field has been wrongfully undermined.
In sum, there are a few questions related to the evidences provided in the prompt. These questions call into doubt; the validty of the evidences. If these remain unanswered, the conclusion would lie upon unwarranted premises and evidences that weaken the argument as a whole
Comments
e-rater score report
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: 25 15
No. of Words: 489 350
No. of Characters: 2452 1500
No. of Different Words: 206 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.702 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.014 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.934 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 164 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 142 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.56 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.287 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.48 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.322 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.517 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.124 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 204, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ristics of these two classes of children similar? If no, then it may be the case ...
^^
Line 5, column 366, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'could'.
Suggestion: could
...in the technique used by Dr. Karp which could possibly mean that the observation-centered tech...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, lastly, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, well, while, as to, as well as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 35.0 19.6327345309 178% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2504.0 2260.96107784 111% => OK
No of words: 489.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12065439673 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70248278971 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9925670748 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 204.123752495 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.429447852761 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 751.5 705.55239521 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: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.653662181 57.8364921388 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.16 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.56 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.76 5.70786347227 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.261896919569 0.218282227539 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0824014942064 0.0743258471296 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0636230775419 0.0701772020484 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143619190712 0.128457276422 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0730311867384 0.0628817314937 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.81 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.