The entire argument revolves around the notion that Dr. Karp and Dr. Field found different results from different experimentation techniques and Dr. Karp concludes the work of Dr. Field wrong without proper justifications. The argument that Tertian children gave better response to an interview-centered research compared to an observation-centered research is flawed because of numerous reasons, including the sample of children used for the study might have changed during the long span of 20 years.
The children of Tertia interviewed by Dr. Karp had the opportunity to carve out certain words or feelings that gave an impression that they were reared by their biological parents instead of other members of the village. But the case might be that since the children were reared by other villagers, they longed for their biological parents affection. Hence they spoke more about their biological parents.
We can't be sure about the conclusion that Dr. Field draws without knowing what questions were asked and what answers were given by the children. It is possible that majority of the questions in the interview were on their biological parents and maybe only 2 out of 10 questions were on their rearing practices. Since, the questions can skew the conclusion, the argument proposed by Dr. Karp on the invalidity of Dr. Field's research is not justified.
Moreover, how can one believe the answers given by the children in an interview to face value. Occasionally, people during an interview exaggerate their answers to make them palatable or more believable. There is a possibility that the children might have modified their answers to sound good or reasonable to the outside society where children are raised by their biological parents generally. In Dr. Field's work, there was no interview and every movement recorded was intrinsic. Hence, there were less chances of faking an action because everybody is in their natural state, making observation based approach more reliable than interview-centered.
In conclusion, though Dr. Karps work bring out the fact that children do have feelings for their biological parents, the argument that Tertian children are raised by biological parents is flawed. Instead of biasing towards a particular work, anthropologists should conduct both the methods with the same sample of children simultaneously.
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-21-outline
----------------------------
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: 15 15
No. of Words: 369 350
No. of Characters: 1954 1500
No. of Different Words: 182 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.383 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.295 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.935 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 144 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.6 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.913 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.333 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.377 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.622 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.12 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 460, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...f children used for the study might have changed during the long span of 20 years...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ed during the long span of 20 years. The children of Tertia interviewed by Dr. K...
^^^
Line 4, column 352, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...for their biological parents affection. Hence they spoke more about their biological ...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 4, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
... about their biological parents. We cant be sure about the conclusion that Dr. F...
^^^^
Line 8, column 500, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun chances is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...corded was intrinsic. Hence, there were less chances of faking an action because eve...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, may, moreover, so, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1995.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 369.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.40650406504 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38284983912 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01970963975 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 204.123752495 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.50406504065 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 593.1 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.6875106838 57.8364921388 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.0 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6 23.324526521 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.2 5.70786347227 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.246504707013 0.218282227539 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0824817177497 0.0743258471296 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0518756067168 0.0701772020484 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117681471329 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0784054739926 0.0628817314937 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.3799401198 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.5979740519 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.29 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 98.500998004 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.