The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of a manufacturing company.
"During the past year, workers at our newly opened factory reported 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than workers at nearby Panoply Industries. Panoply produces products very similar to those produced at our factory, but its work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers are significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents. Panoply's superior safety record can therefore be attributed to its shorter work shifts, which allow its employees to get adequate amounts of rest."
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.
The above argument is based on multiple assumptions. Despite the fact that the argument seems convincing, if we question the assumptions, we can see that there are different explanations that can account for the situation and not just the difference between the work shifts in the two factories.
First of all, the argument assumes that all the on-the-job accidents are repaorted. This assumption, however, may not be true. If workers in Panoply face consequences of reporting accidents then the reported accidents in panoply would, expectedly, be low. For example, there can be a rule in Panoply which says that an injured worker must leave the job. In this case, many people would not report accidents to prevent losing their job. Hence, Panoply would have less reports. Thus, we see that other factors leading to less accident reporting in panoply can also be the cause of the apparent difference in people reporting.
Along with the possibility of less people willing to report accidents in Panoply, one cannot write out the possibility of Panoply applying impressive safety measures. If Panoply paid a lot of attentiaon to workplace safety, it is very likely that accidents in Panoply would decrease. Hence, not just reduced work hours but enhanced safety can also lead to reduced number of accidents.
In addition to Panoply having great worker safety, there is also a chance that the newly opened factory is dangerous to workers. As it is a new company, the company might not be stable and the the managers might be focused more on issues more important issues like finances rather than worker safety. This can lead to unsafe working conditions which, in turn, will lead to more accidents in the workplace.
It is possible that longer shifts lead to increased accidents, particularly when the experts are saying it. But, as discussed in this essay, there are other situations which can lead to the higher number in the new factory and not just the difference in shifts. Hence, ascribing the entire 30 percent more accidents to longer work shifts can be faulty.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-27 | evanlu | 73 | view |
| 2019-06-12 | Gh.Ne | 82 | view |
| 2017-07-27 | roncy | view | |
| 2016-08-24 | Divya Chalise | 79 | view |
| 2016-08-24 | darshanchalise | 50 | view |
- Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should 50
- The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of a manufacturing company."During the past year, workers at our newly opened factory reported 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than workers at nearby Panoply Industries. Panoply produces products 50
- "On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the 66
- The following is part of a memorandum from the president of Humana University."Last year the number of students who enrolled in online degree programs offered by nearby Omni University increased by 50 percent. During the same year, Omni showed a significa 83
- The following appeared as part of an article in a Dillton newspaper."In an effort to bring new jobs to Dillton and stimulate the city's flagging economy, Dillton's city council voted last year to lower the city's corporate tax rate by 15 percent; at the s 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 462, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun reports is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ng their job. Hence, Panoply would have less reports. Thus, we see that other factor...
^^^^
Line 3, column 31, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...porting. Along with the possibility of less people willing to report accidents in P...
^^^^
Line 4, column 189, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...ny, the company might not be stable and the the managers might be focused more on issue...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 189, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...ny, the company might not be stable and the the managers might be focused more on issue...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 264, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ore on issues more important issues like finances rather than worker safety. This...
^^
Line 5, column 190, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e other situations which can lead to the higher number in the new factory and not...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'then', 'thus', 'for example', 'in addition', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.241558441558 0.25644967241 94% => OK
Verbs: 0.150649350649 0.15541462614 97% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0857142857143 0.0836205057962 103% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0623376623377 0.0520304965353 120% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0207792207792 0.0272364105082 76% => OK
Prepositions: 0.116883116883 0.125424944231 93% => OK
Participles: 0.0467532467532 0.0416121511921 112% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.6214677231 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0311688311688 0.026700313972 117% => OK
Particles: 0.0025974025974 0.001811407834 143% => OK
Determiners: 0.0909090909091 0.113004496875 80% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0467532467532 0.0255425247493 183% => Less modal verbs wanted (like 'must , shall , will , should , would , can , could , may , and might').
WH_determiners: 0.012987012987 0.0127820249294 102% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2070.0 2731.13054187 76% => OK
No of words: 344.0 446.07635468 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.01744186047 6.12365571057 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30665032142 4.57801047555 94% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.389534883721 0.378187486979 103% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.281976744186 0.287650121315 98% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.186046511628 0.208842608468 89% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.127906976744 0.135150697306 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6214677231 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 207.018472906 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.505813953488 0.469332199767 108% => OK
Word variations: 52.9161663566 52.1807786196 101% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.039408867 90% => OK
Sentence length: 19.1111111111 23.2022227129 82% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.1308406825 57.7814097925 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.0 141.986410481 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1111111111 23.2022227129 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.722222222222 0.724660767414 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 3.58251231527 167% => OK
Readability: 47.3087855297 51.9672348444 91% => OK
Elegance: 1.73333333333 1.8405768891 94% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.346235769229 0.441005458295 79% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.127529524719 0.135418324435 94% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0624951314374 0.0829849096947 75% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.54948112287 0.58762219726 94% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.167123360703 0.147661913831 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140087261548 0.193483328276 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0735896940826 0.0970749176394 76% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.379774874773 0.42659136922 89% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0568522770006 0.0774707102158 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231070566453 0.312017818177 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0416048819497 0.0698173142475 60% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.87684729064 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 9.0 5.36822660099 168% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 14.657635468 116% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.