The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants.
"Recently, butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. This change, however, has had little impact on our customers. In fact, 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 do not distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine."
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
In the passage, we are informed that margarine replacement with butter has little impact on customer of Happy Pancake House restaurants. By citing that feedbacks from both customers and servants, the author ascribes this phenomenon to the reason that customers either cannot distinguish difference between them or they use term "butter" to refer to either of them. Quite convincing though such explanation appears at first glance, we cannot safely draw a conclusion that it is the unique one that accounts for the facts presented in the argument. Therefore, we need more explanations which could rival with the one given in the argument.
To start off, the author attributes little customers' complains to their satisfaction about such change. While this may be true, this situation may result from other reasons as well. First of all, it is possible that most of customers lack channel to vent their angry about such product replacement. If this is the case, just 2 percent of negative feedbacks could have nothing to do with customers' positive attitude. Thus, it could be explained as stemming from no way for them to send their dissatisfactions back to the company. Second, while such statistics seem optimistic, it is of equal probability that this company only conducted the survey with limited responders. If we can verify that only a small proportion of end customers had joined such survey, the underlying logic will be weakened, namely: 2 percent of customers' complains represent their content about such replacement.
Furthermore, servants' report about lack of complains may lend more support to the author's conclusion. However, few negative message is presumably from other factors as well. For example, customers have limited time to complain such unfair replacement, and their indifferent attitude has been misrepresented by servants. Moreover, servants in Happy Pancake House may distort the fact in order to please their senior management team. Without additional investigation, we cannot decide which factor could finally lead to such positive feedback from servants. It is even likely that all of the aforementioned factors have conspired to this phenomenon.
Last but not least, while customers from Happy Pancake House are contented with such change, it is reckless to claim that this results from their inability from discriminating those two products, or their understanding about the term 'butter'. Other factors lead to the aforementioned situations. For example, they are extremely busy with their own business so that the replacement of butter seems inconsequential. Or, they intended to try with different alternatives instead of sticking to a single product. If either of two is true, then the author's explanation may become untenable.
In summary, while the two reasons given by the author seem compelling, in the absence of sufficient information, we cannot establish a causal relationship between them and little complain from customers in Happy Pancake House restaurants. Therefore, the root cause of the aforementioned phenomenon is such a case that we should consider more explanations which could account for the facts presented in the argument.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-15 | TANVIR SIDDIKE MOIN | 45 | view |
| 2023-08-12 | sam 27 | 66 | view |
| 2023-05-25 | diya | 60 | view |
| 2022-10-09 | Mahesh Ch | 16 | view |
| 2022-09-24 | Joyce chou | 55 | view |
- Some people believe it is often necessary even desirable for political leaders to withhold information from the public Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns wit 94
- The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them not by their contemporaries Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you ta 66
- To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to addre 66
- Fifteen years ago Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors Since that time Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes and overall student 68
- The following appeared in a memo from New Ventures Consulting to the president of HobCo Inc a chain of hobby shops Our team has completed its research on suitable building sites for a new HobCo hobby Shop in the city of Grilldon We discovered that there a 70
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 497 350
No. of Characters: 2622 1500
No. of Different Words: 238 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.722 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.276 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.886 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 192 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 148 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 111 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 78 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.708 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.324 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.285 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.472 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.104 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 152, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ancake House restaurants. By citing that feedbacks from both customers and servan...
^^
Line 3, column 217, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the customers') or simply say ''most customers''.
Suggestion: most of the customers; most customers
...well. First of all, it is possible that most of customers lack channel to vent their angry about ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 83, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... complains may lend more support to the authors conclusion. However, few negative messa...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 580, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...k from servants. It is even likely that all of the aforementioned factors have conspired t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 543, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...uct. If either of two is true, then the authors explanation may become untenable. In...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 298, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t cause of the aforementioned phenomenon is such a case that we should consider m...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, second, so, then, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, in summary, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 28.8173652695 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 72.0 55.5748502994 130% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2702.0 2260.96107784 120% => OK
No of words: 497.0 441.139720559 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.43661971831 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72159896747 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03689925179 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494969818913 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 821.7 705.55239521 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 4.96107784431 262% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.1967704809 57.8364921388 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.583333333 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7083333333 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.125 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.166645196974 0.218282227539 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0528265424021 0.0743258471296 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0815487695982 0.0701772020484 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111796708765 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0357065609282 0.0628817314937 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.