The author presents an argument that Prunty County should emulate the road improvement projects of Butler county in order to improve highway safety and reduce the number of accidents. It is also known that Prunty County attempted to address the problem by reducing the speed limit from 55 to 45 miles per hour and it did not decrease the number of accidents. In contrast, in Butler County, road improvement projects were associated with a 25 percent reduction in the number of accidents as the speed limit remained fixed at 55 miles per hour. The presented argument rests on incomplete data and fallacious assumptions. The erroneous nature of this argument, alternative explanations for the given observations, and resolutions will be discussed below.
First, the author makes a major assumption that the demographics, infrastructure, and the climate of Prunty County and Butler County are similar enough to warrant generalization. It is assumed that the success of the reduction. The author presents evidence that Butler County reduced the number of accidents by 25 percent after improving roads and resurfacing highways, among other things. However, it is possible that the road conditions in Prunty County are not in need of repair or improvement and are not the cause of the failure in reducing the number of accidents. If Prunty and Butler County are not directly comparable, then drawing a common conclusion about the causes of their accidents is not conducive. For example, the drivers in Prunty County may differ greatly in terms of socioeconomic status, behavior, and lifestyle. If this is the case, then addressing the roads and the infrastructure will not address the issue.
Second, the author fails to provide quantitative data about the number of accidents and what their causes were. The nature of the accidents is addressed in a cursory and incomplete manner. It is stated that the number of accidents did not decrease with the speed limit reduction, but if the number increased is not addressed. If in fact, the number of accidents increased, it may be because the population of Prunty County is growing and that with more drivers, accidents become more probable. The author does address that police have reported drivers exceeding the speed limit but does not provide strong enough evidence that the speeding was the direct cause of accidents.
Several recommendations are recommended to more effectively identify the failure of the speed limit reduction initiative in Prunty County. Data from more counties with similar characteristics to Prunty County are needed to address the efficacy of speed limit reduction on highway safety. Prunty County highway patrol should collaborate and offer more detailed data about the nature of the speeding incidents and the degree of severity. General population growth and loss should be considered by the author in order to separate the effect of accidents due to changes in road policies and general population growth and loss.
- The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal."A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situ 80
- The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia."Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, f 49
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company."According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than i 29
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 79
- In an attempt to improve highway safety, Prunty County last year lowered its speed limit from 55 to 45 miles per hour on all county highways. But this effort has failed: the number of accidents has not decreased, and, based on reports by the highway patro 55
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: 21 15
No. of Words: 479 350
No. of Characters: 2464 1500
No. of Different Words: 194 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.678 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.144 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.757 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 207 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 132 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 95 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 65 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.81 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.994 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.524 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.356 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.508 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.103 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, so, then, for example, in contrast, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 11.1786427146 197% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 55.5748502994 119% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2520.0 2260.96107784 111% => OK
No of words: 479.0 441.139720559 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26096033403 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67825486995 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84762518431 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 204.123752495 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.417536534447 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 792.0 705.55239521 112% => 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: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.5708841863 57.8364921388 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.0 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8095238095 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.14285714286 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.348392929378 0.218282227539 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106787815339 0.0743258471296 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0859831656398 0.0701772020484 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.22315291647 0.128457276422 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0654892266858 0.0628817314937 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.