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.
dr. karp's arugment is actually a threefold: 1) children talk about their biological parents more than the entire village thus they are not reared by their biological parents, not the village, 2) dr. field's conclusion is inaccurate thus the observation method is invalid, and 3) interview-centered approach will yield better and more accurate results. All three arguments have obvious flaws.
first off, there is no causation relationship between the time spent talking about something and the upbringing of someone. if children were asked solely about their parents by karp, it is no surprise that their answers mostly involve their parents. there is no information on what type of questions were asked, so we can not conclude that the questions are asked in an unbiased way. even if children do talk about their parents more than the village, that does not logically lead to karp's conclusion. In fact, the logic for the exact opposite conclusion also works: because they are not raised by their parents, thus not having any special relationship to their parents like other children outside of the village, they are particularly fascinated and fixed on their parents. we can see that this simple observation does not necessarily invalid field's conclusion. we also do not know how many children talk about their parents more in the village. this phenomenon can be a completely outlier thus does not represent the all the children in the village.
even if we assume karp is right and field's conclusion is invalid, that does not mean field's approach is of no value to any anthropologist. it is possible that the observation method is working perfectly fine in other research topics in the past, but field did not use this method accurately.it is also likely that observation method only works the best on certain types of cases, and the one field worked on does not fit very well. there are many reasons why field's conclusion is not accurate but one failure can not discredit observation method as a whole.
just because one method did not succeed does not entail the other method is inherently better. interview-centered method might have its own flaws and is equally possible to fail if not used accurately. For example, it is harder to control the consistency of results using interview method. The results and answers from people heavily depend on who is asking the questions, what questions are asked, in what tone those questions are asked, and the time and location when those questions were asked. there are many variables that are not easily controlled. Additionally, interview method is limitted on how many people are interviewed and if people are giving out the truthful information. Not all the people in the village are equally willing to be interviewed in the first place, and for the people who were interviewed, it is not taken for granted that they are telling all the truth all the time. In conclusion, there are many flaws for interview method as well, and just because it is a different method than observation method does not mean it will yield better or successful results.
In conclusion, all three main arguments by dr. karp are clearly flawed.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-21-outline
----------------------------
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: 15 15
No. of Words: 529 350
No. of Characters: 2588 1500
No. of Different Words: 208 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.796 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.892 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.685 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 178 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 137 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 35.267 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 28.574 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.358 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.574 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.132 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Dr
dr. karps arugment is actually a threefold...
^^
Line 1, column 5, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Karps
dr. karps arugment is actually a threefold: 1 chi...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 389, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...All three arguments have obvious flaws. first off, there is no causation relatio...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: First
...hree arguments have obvious flaws. first off, there is no causation relationship...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 125, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...omething and the upbringing of someone. if children were asked solely about their ...
^^
Line 3, column 251, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: There
...r answers mostly involve their parents. there is no information on what type of quest...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 365, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an unbiased way" with adverb for "unbiased"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...t conclude that the questions are asked in an unbiased way. even if children do talk about their p...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 385, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Even
...questions are asked in an unbiased way. even if children do talk about their parents...
^^^^
Line 3, column 777, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: We
... fascinated and fixed on their parents. we can see that this simple observation do...
^^
Line 3, column 865, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: We
... necessarily invalid fields conclusion. we also do not know how many children talk...
^^
Line 3, column 949, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: This
...bout their parents more in the village. this phenomenon can be a completely outlier ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 972, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('completely') instead an adjective, or a noun ('outlier') instead of another adjective.
... in the village. this phenomenon can be a completely outlier thus does not represent the all the chi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1054, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nt the all the children in the village. even if we assume karp is right and fiel...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Even
...e all the children in the village. even if we assume karp is right and fields c...
^^^^
Line 5, column 140, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...h is of no value to any anthropologist. it is possible that the observation method...
^^
Line 5, column 433, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: There
...field worked on does not fit very well. there are many reasons why fields conclusion ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 559, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...iscredit observation method as a whole. just because one method did not succeed ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Just
...dit observation method as a whole. just because one method did not succeed does...
^^^^
Line 7, column 96, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Interview-centered
... the other method is inherently better. interview-centered method might have its own flaws and is ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 499, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: There
...cation when those questions were asked. there are many variables that are not easily ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1090, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ill yield better or successful results. In conclusion, all three main arguments ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, if, so, thus, well, for example, in conclusion, in fact, talking about, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 41.0 19.6327345309 209% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2649.0 2260.96107784 117% => OK
No of words: 529.0 441.139720559 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00756143667 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79583152331 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75380111578 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.421550094518 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 819.9 705.55239521 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.67365269461 358% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.9545865992 57.8364921388 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.375 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0416666667 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.91666666667 5.70786347227 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 21.0 5.25449101796 400% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => 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: 0.143004603465 0.218282227539 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.041430211505 0.0743258471296 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0358184907352 0.0701772020484 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0870451826272 0.128457276422 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0466173599637 0.0628817314937 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => 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: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.68 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.