The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.
“Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures.”
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The argument that the interview-based approach of Dr. Karp renders Dr. Field’s observation-centered approach invalid is deeply flawed in reason and evidence provided, hence, can not be corroborated.
Let us first considered the issue of language as a barrier against the interview-centered approach. Conducting anthropological research based on Dr. Karp’s approach will be extremely strenous to sustain as there is no guarantee, rather, a very high probability that the local language of settlement being studied will not be one that the researcher is already familiar with. Now, it is possible that the study of Tertia village does not have this limitation, hence the immature conclusion drawn by Dr. Karp.
Also, it is difficult to established from the argument the techniques employed in performing the interview-centered approach, as it is a well-known phenomenon that people’s actions and how they are perceived by others is usually different from their view of themselves. Hence, the information gathered from this approach is not reliable.
Another thing to consider from the argument is the lack of substantiation on the parameters used to compare and contrast the results from the different approaches.
Based on the stated evidence or rather lack of such, it is clear interview-centered approach does not invalidate observation-centered approach.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-01 | Sophy@ | 66 | view |
| 2023-09-01 | Sophy@ | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-23 | dhruv7315 | 77 | view |
| 2023-08-19 | Mayuresh08 | 64 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Dinesh4518 | 85 | view |
- Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well being of the societies and environments in which they operate Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations provided they operate within the law is to make as mu 58
- In many organizations perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team Summarize the points made in the lecture you just heard explaining how they cast doubt on points made in the reading 70
- The following appeared in an article written by Dr Karp an anthropologist Twenty years ago Dr Field a noted anthropologist visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather tha 33
- Young people enjoy life more than older people do 76
- Altruism is a type of behaviour in which an animal sacrifices its own interest for that of another animal or group of animals Altruism is the opposite of selfishness individuals performing altruistic acts gain nothing for themselves Summarize the points m 80
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, if, so, well, another thing
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.9520958084 23% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 55.5748502994 45% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1163.0 2260.96107784 51% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 206.0 441.139720559 47% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.64563106796 5.12650576532 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.78849575616 4.56307096286 83% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.68120274538 2.78398813304 132% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 204.123752495 60% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.592233009709 0.468620217663 126% => OK
syllable_count: 348.3 705.55239521 49% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 19.7664670659 40% => 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: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.8862424946 57.8364921388 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.375 119.503703932 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.75 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.875 5.70786347227 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
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: 0.117381165885 0.218282227539 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0548705795222 0.0743258471296 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0434210586337 0.0701772020484 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0656621289137 0.128457276422 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0344662613882 0.0628817314937 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 14.3799401198 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.79 12.5979740519 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.55 8.32208582834 115% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 98.500998004 62% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, if, so, well, another thing
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.9520958084 23% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 55.5748502994 45% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1163.0 2260.96107784 51% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 206.0 441.139720559 47% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.64563106796 5.12650576532 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.78849575616 4.56307096286 83% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.68120274538 2.78398813304 132% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 204.123752495 60% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.592233009709 0.468620217663 126% => OK
syllable_count: 348.3 705.55239521 49% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 19.7664670659 40% => 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: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.8862424946 57.8364921388 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.375 119.503703932 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.75 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.875 5.70786347227 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
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: 0.117381165885 0.218282227539 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0548705795222 0.0743258471296 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0434210586337 0.0701772020484 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0656621289137 0.128457276422 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0344662613882 0.0628817314937 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 14.3799401198 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.79 12.5979740519 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.55 8.32208582834 115% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 98.500998004 62% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.