While it is possible that the change of replacing butter with margarine has had little impact on the customers of Happy Pancake House, this argument is rife with flaws and unwarranted assumptions. Thus, without further evidence or support, the argument is not strong enough to lead to the conclusion the the change in Happy Pancake House has no impact.
First, the argument fails to justify that the survey results are representative, reliable and valid. Since there is no information regarding its sampling method, it is possible that there is a sampling bias. For example, if the survey was conducted in a small town, we cannot use the data obtained to extrapolate to the whole region of southwestern United States. The indication that "a number of customers" did not complain is flawed for the same reason. Since we do not know how many customers are asked, the results cannot be generalize to the majority of customers. The interpretation that 2 percent of complaint does not count as impact might also be flawed. If the base population and profit is enormous, even 2 percent of loss can be colossal. Thus, the information regarding the characteristics of the samples and their sampling population is needed to bolster the argument.
Even if the samples are representative, the wording of the survey might be vague or even misleading. When exploring a trend, we often needs several questions to capture a panoramic view. If there is only one question among a myriad of irrelevant ones, customers might neglect this question and are unable to fully express their view on this issue. The wording also has an influence on customers' reply. For instance, even if the customers indicate no complaint regarding the change, it does not mean that they are satisfy about it. Thus, the detailed content of the questionnaire is needed to further validate the argument.
Other than that, the way they attain the data is flawed. It is indicated that they deceive the customer and tell them it was butter when it was actually margarine. Even if it has no impact in short term, it will have more serious consequences when the customers know that the "butter" they consumed is actually margarine.
In addition, using the term "butter" does not mean that customers cannot distinguish butter from margarine. They might refer to margarine as "butter of lower quality" or "butter of strange taste." Even though margarine is refered as "butter" in these expressions, these terms clearly indicates that the customers are aware of the difference between them.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed primarily for its unwarranted assumption that the survey results are valid. Further information concerning the characteristics of the samples, the sampling population and the content of the questionnaire are needed to further bolster the argument. Also the method used to obtain the results might have negative and inadvertent impact in the long run.
- Some people believe that college students should consider only their own talents and interests when choosing a field of study Others believe that college students should base their choice of a field of study on the availability of jobs in that field Write 66
- According to a recent report cheating among college and university students is on the rise However Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code which calls for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeav 69
- Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take 66
- Young people should be encouraged to pursue long term realistic goals rather than seek immediate fame and recognition Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 58
- The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals In a laboratory study of liquid antibacterial hand soaps a concentrated solution of UltraClean produced a 40 percent greater reduction in the bacteria population than did the 68
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 481 350
No. of Characters: 2384 1500
No. of Different Words: 209 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.683 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.956 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.758 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 176 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 130 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 93 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.24 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.63 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.72 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.286 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.513 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.112 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 301, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...strong enough to lead to the conclusion the the change in Happy Pancake House has no im...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 301, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...strong enough to lead to the conclusion the the change in Happy Pancake House has no im...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 515, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'satisfied'.
Suggestion: satisfied
... change, it does not mean that they are satisfy about it. Thus, the detailed content of...
^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 287, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...needed to further bolster the argument. Also the method used to obtain the results m...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, if, regarding, so, thus, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in short
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2524.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 481.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2474012474 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68313059816 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09805911363 2.78398813304 111% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 204.123752495 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.453222453222 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 789.3 705.55239521 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 2.70958083832 406% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.1715066716 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.166666667 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0416666667 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.125 5.70786347227 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.105216275535 0.218282227539 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0296064667973 0.0743258471296 40% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0648875452732 0.0701772020484 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0716125004915 0.128457276422 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.112498621373 0.0628817314937 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 98.500998004 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.