Dr. Karp believes that Dr. Field’s conclusions about children in Tertia related to their relationship and upbringing by whole village instead of their biological parents are not supported with facts. Also, Dr. Karp states that his modern interview-based research program will reveal the truth both in Tertia and other villages. Although, such observation by Dr. Karp seems logical at first glance, due to unfounded claims and inconsiderate approach to details, this position fails to be factual.
Firstly, the twenty year gap between both anthropologist’ researches should be taken into account. 20 year passing by means that Dr. Karp is actually interviewing next generation of children, instead of the same as Dr. Field did. It is plausible to assume that within 20 years social structure of the village faced changes and as result youngsters became more connected to their parents and families’ ties among each other became weaker. Thus, it is impossible to suggest that Dr. Field’s conclusions are false as there is a chance that they showed children’s views of past.
Secondly, two approaches of scientist are fully different which makes it incompatible for comparison. Interviewing someone and observing them from distance is two totally different approaches. It is possible that if Dr. Karp instead of interviewing children, simply analyzed their daily life, could have been sure about their relationship with olds who were not their biological parents. Furthermore, it is logical to expect that children would talk mostly about their biological parents as their attachment to them is stronger compared to other parents. However, it still fails to prove that those non-biological parents did not have any role in their upbringing as Dr. Karp suggests.
Lastly, even if Dr. Field’s conclusions are imperfect about Tertia’s youngsters, claiming that observation based approach is falsified as a whole is unsupported claim. It is still possible that Dr. Field simply failed to give enough attention to details and conclusions became distorted due to that reason. However, it is still not justified to object that any observation-centered research is mistaken, as errors can be simply due to researcher’s individual faults.
In conclusion, Dr. Karp’s claims are weakened due to 3 reasons: He failed to take into account 20 year gap between both research projects, he takes the results of interviews as final conclusion instead of applying observations in parallel. Also, suggesting that all observation based approaches are falsified only by analyzing single research weakens Dr.Karp’s conclusions.
- 23 Governments should place few if any restrictions on scientific research and development 66
- 1 quot Commuters complain that increased rush hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time The favored proposal of the motorists 039 lobby is to widen the highway adding an additional lane of 69
- The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things 58
- The following appeared in an article written by Dr Karp an anthropologist quot 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 villag 67
- In any field of inquiry the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions 66
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 404 350
No. of Characters: 2155 1500
No. of Different Words: 211 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.483 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.334 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.946 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 164 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 128 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 91 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.765 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.941 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.824 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.339 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.339 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.121 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 104, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'gap' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'gaps'.
Suggestion: gaps
... He failed to take into account 20 year gap between both research projects, he take...
^^^
Line 5, column 354, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Karp
...by analyzing single research weakens Dr.Karp’s conclusions.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, still, thus, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2225.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 403.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.52109181141 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48049772903 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09916518691 2.78398813304 111% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 204.123752495 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535980148883 0.468620217663 114% => OK
syllable_count: 636.3 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.257991534 57.8364921388 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.882352941 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7058823529 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.70588235294 5.70786347227 117% => 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 : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.219448762022 0.218282227539 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0785647460709 0.0743258471296 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.048957380472 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13459664101 0.128457276422 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0504096189231 0.0628817314937 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.3799401198 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.5979740519 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 98.500998004 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.