"A ten-year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago, approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets, whereas today that number is nearly 80 percent. Another study, however, suggests that during the same ten-year period, the number of bicycle-related accidents has increased 200 percent. These results demonstrate that bicyclists feel safer because they are wearing helmets, and they take more risks as a result. Thus, to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accidents, the government should concentrate more on educating people about bicycle safety and less on encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets."
This argument claims that the government has to educate people about safe riding and discourage wearing helmets when they ride bikes because bicyclists with helmet caused more accidents. However, the argument depends on several unsubstantiated assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.
First, the cited statistics indicate that the accidents involved people riding bicycles were doubled for ten years while the number of people riding bicycles with helmets on. Unless the author shows that the absolute number of people riding bicycles doesn’t change over ten years, this argument is flawed. It would be natural that the number of accidents increases as the cycling population increases. Without presenting the absolute numbers of the people riding bicycles and the accidents in now and ten years ago, the statistic doesn’t support the author’s claim that riding with helmets increases the number of accidents.
Moreover, the author assumes that people wearing helmets while they riding bicycles are willing to take more risks. However, logically, people want to wear helmets because they want to protect their heads from unfavorable accidents in the first place. Unless the author presents the statistics that the majority of people ride bicycles with helmets on enjoys the extreme bike riding, the assumption will not hold.
Finally, the argument states that the government discourages people to wear helmets in order to reduce the number of accidents as well as educate people about safe riding. It is questionable that safety education and discouraging to wear helmets would decrease the chance of getting involved in accidents. On the contrary, the government should recommend or even enforce people to put on helmets so people prevent any fatal head damages.
In conclusion, based on the unwarranted assumptions mentioned above, the argument fails to provide enough evidence that wearing helmets while riding bicycles increases the number of bicycle accidents. Unless the argument presents more specific data on all relevant numbers show the correlation between wearing helmets and accidents, it lacks logical reasoning and evidence.
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future 66
- Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study. 50
- All students should be required to take the driver s education course at Centerville High School In the past two years several accidents in and around Centerville have involved teenage drivers Since a number of parents in Centerville have complained that 86
- The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but by the general welfare of its people. 58
- "A recent study rating 300 male and female advertising executives according to the average number of hours they sleep per night showed an association between the amount of sleep the executives need and the success of their firms. Of the advertising f 69
Comments
Essay evaluation report
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: 14 15
No. of Words: 331 350
No. of Characters: 1793 1500
No. of Different Words: 154 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.265 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.417 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.564 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 161 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 114 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 71 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.643 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.576 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.436 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.679 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.13 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 302, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...is therefore unpersuasive as it stands. First, the cited statistics indicate tha...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 645, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...mets increases the number of accidents. Moreover, the author assumes that people...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, well, while, as to, in conclusion, as well as, on the contrary, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 19.6327345309 31% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 55.5748502994 74% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1859.0 2260.96107784 82% => OK
No of words: 329.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.65045592705 5.12650576532 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25891501996 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68166767952 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 204.123752495 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.477203647416 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 568.8 705.55239521 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.5892813568 57.8364921388 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.785714286 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.71428571429 5.70786347227 170% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.197829653661 0.218282227539 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0841490748094 0.0743258471296 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.051403713553 0.0701772020484 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120008825122 0.128457276422 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0427677604167 0.0628817314937 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 14.3799401198 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.3550499002 82% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.79 12.5979740519 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.52 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 98.500998004 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.