The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants.
"Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. Only about 2 percent of customers have complained, indicating that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have reported that a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. Clearly, either these customers cannot distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine. Thus, we predict that Happy Pancake House will be able to increase profits dramatically if we extend this cost-saving change to all our restaurants in the southeast and northeast as well."
The author of this argument claims that Happy Pancake Restaurants can gain more profits by replacing butter instead of margarine. To justify the recommendation, the author cites the following facts. (1) Running this plan in the southwestern United States causes only 2 percent o customers to complain. (2) According to servers' reports, customers do not complain, and this they cannot distinguish between butter and margarine. (3) This plan can be successful in other restaurants. Scrutiny each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible supports to the issue.
First, a serious of problems with the argument arises from the scant statistical information on which it stands. The author mentions that only 2 percent of customers have complained, so he concludes that 98 percent of customers are happy with the change. Nonetheless, if the number of customer in this restaurant was too low, the author cannot rely on it. In addition, customers in this restaurant may not be representative of the overall population of customers in around the country.
Second, base on the fact that customers do not complain, the author infers that they cannot realize different between butter and margarine. In fact, it is possible people can distinguish the changes in their meals, but it is difficult for them to complain and prefer to do not come back this restaurant. Without considering this possible scenario, the author cannot justifiably conclude that people satisfy of the use of butter.
In third place, the author provides no assurance that this plan can have the same results in other restaurants. The author must consider other factors, which effective in this success, such as the number of customers or even kinds of food they order. It is entirely possible, people who go to the south restaurant agree with use butter instead of the margarine, while the scenario can be different in other places. So, there is not the warranty that we can generalize the result of only the southwestern United States to other places.
In sum, the argument is logically flowed and therefore, unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the author must provide more statistical information about servers’ reports. In order to evaluate the recommendation, we must know about all possible factors about other restaurants. In addition, it would be better to know other reasons that people do not complain.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 383, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...er reasons that people do not complain.
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'nonetheless', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'third', 'while', 'as to', 'in addition', 'in fact', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.251685393258 0.25644967241 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.123595505618 0.15541462614 80% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0808988764045 0.0836205057962 97% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0539325842697 0.0520304965353 104% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0359550561798 0.0272364105082 132% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.139325842697 0.125424944231 111% => OK
Participles: 0.0157303370787 0.0416121511921 38% => Some participles wanted.
Conjunctions: 2.90786428072 2.79052419416 104% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0247191011236 0.026700313972 93% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.107865168539 0.113004496875 95% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0337078651685 0.0255425247493 132% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00674157303371 0.0127820249294 53% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2426.0 2731.13054187 89% => OK
No of words: 391.0 446.07635468 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.20460358056 6.12365571057 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44676510885 4.57801047555 97% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.409207161125 0.378187486979 108% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.299232736573 0.287650121315 104% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.222506393862 0.208842608468 107% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.156010230179 0.135150697306 115% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90786428072 2.79052419416 104% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 207.018472906 92% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.485933503836 0.469332199767 104% => OK
Word variations: 52.2919894303 52.1807786196 100% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 18.619047619 23.2022227129 80% => OK
Sentence length SD: 27.5898860827 57.7814097925 48% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.523809524 141.986410481 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.619047619 23.2022227129 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.761904761905 0.724660767414 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 48.5423212763 51.9672348444 93% => OK
Elegance: 1.90526315789 1.8405768891 104% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.408157754255 0.441005458295 93% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.117183813106 0.135418324435 87% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0615790114661 0.0829849096947 74% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.548887311234 0.58762219726 93% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.101169473515 0.147661913831 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.171141515083 0.193483328276 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0751324964134 0.0970749176394 77% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.435707067441 0.42659136922 102% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0287233283969 0.0774707102158 37% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.281733065892 0.312017818177 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0750701243465 0.0698173142475 108% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.33743842365 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.87684729064 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.82512315271 62% => OK
Positive topic words: 9.0 6.46551724138 139% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 5.36822660099 93% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 14.657635468 116% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.