The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals.
"In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps, a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bacteria than did the liquid hand soaps currently used in our hospitals. During our recent test of regular-strength UltraClean with doctors, nurses, and visitors at our hospital in Worktown, the hospital reported significantly fewer cases of patient infection (a 20 percent reduction) than did any of the other hospitals in our group. The explanation for the 20 percent reduction in patient infections is the use of UltraClean soap."
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.
While this argument has some merit, its line of reasoning requires close examination. The above paragraph states that the UltraClean handsoap is a cut above what currently was being used in the hospital in Worktown.
The laboratory study that is referred to in the paragraph states that a concentrated solution for the UltraClean was used which makes this comparison with the handsoap being used in the hospital foundation less, moreover due to lack of information provided about the effectiveness of the current liquid hand soap the argument proves to be more ineffective.
The reduction of infections mentioned in the hospital of Worktown that is claimed to be because of the use of UltraClean handsoap might have other possible reasons to it like better sanitation of the hospital, advance in technologies and supply of better-quality drugs. The hospital reported to have a 20 percent reduction in cases of infections in patients which partly may have been because of the handsoap which improves personal hygiene nonetheless information like the original number of cases, change in staff etc also have to be taken into consideration before coming to an unbiased conclusion.
One of the explanations can also be the location of the hospital is not convenient to the residents of the town, rather a new hospital closer to them is diverting the traffic. They have also failed to report about the time span in which this observation was done which doesn’t provide clarity and hence only weakens the aspect of this claim. Due to this lack of information about time span of this observation there is a high chance of the numbers dipping down due to a sudden change in volatile reasons like the weather that changes constantly.
In conclusion this argument is a weak one because it depends on only one factor that is the UltraClean liquid handsoap while disregarding the fact that there could be numerous factors affecting the results seen by the hospital.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-27 | SanjanaB | 54 | view |
| 2023-08-03 | Ataraxia-m | 54 | view |
| 2023-02-08 | HSNDEK | 66 | view |
| 2022-09-29 | Ruthvik_542 | 58 | view |
| 2022-08-02 | aggy | 65 | view |
- A recent sales study indicates that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent during the past five years Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants whose specialty is seafood Moreover the majority of fami 55
- The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bacter 65
- A recent sales study indicates that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent during the past five years Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants whose specialty is seafood Moreover the majority of fami 59
- The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bacter 80
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 9 15
No. of Words: 324 350
No. of Characters: 1611 1500
No. of Different Words: 165 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.243 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.972 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.815 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 114 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 93 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 72 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 39 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 36 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.166 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.43 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.756 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.152 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ument proves to be more ineffective. The reduction of infections mentioned in th...
^^^
Line 5, column 272, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...es and supply of better-quality drugs. The hospital reported to have a 20 percent ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, may, moreover, nonetheless, regarding, so, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 11.1786427146 18% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1646.0 2260.96107784 73% => OK
No of words: 323.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0959752322 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23936324884 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86025220271 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 204.123752495 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.50773993808 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 522.9 705.55239521 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 19.7664670659 46% => 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: 35.0 22.8473053892 153% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 84.8106096321 57.8364921388 147% => OK
Chars per sentence: 182.888888889 119.503703932 153% => OK
Words per sentence: 35.8888888889 23.324526521 154% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.44444444444 5.70786347227 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.108381953425 0.218282227539 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0447273882739 0.0743258471296 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0531040221736 0.0701772020484 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0661714095587 0.128457276422 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0598445637509 0.0628817314937 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.5 14.3799401198 143% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.95 48.3550499002 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.9 12.197005988 139% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.0 11.1389221557 144% => OK
text_standard: 21.0 11.9071856287 176% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.