The following appeared as part of an article in a business magazine.
"A recent study rating 300 male and female Mention advertising executives according to the average number of hours they sleep per night showed an association between the amount of sleep the executives need and the success of their firms. Of the advertising firms studied, those whose executives reported needing no more than 6 hours of sleep per night had higher profit margins and faster growth. These results suggest that if a business wants to prosper, it should hire only people who need less than 6 hours of sleep per night."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
An argument is presented in an article in the business field. A survey of 300 male and female advertising executives found that individuals who slept fewer than six hours a night were more productive and helped their organizations make more money and expand more quickly. The argument rendered is not cogent enough and has some ambiguities.
Firstly, the survey considered has been done overall on only 300 males and females who are advertising executives. The question is whether the number of individuals used in the study is adequate for such a conclusion. Whether the consideration of only executives is rational? Do not other individuals and employees have a role in this subject? By consideration of executives, the researchers intentionally give orientation to their survey. This can cause bias, which is not desirable. The results of the study would have been more acceptable if the researchers would have also randomly used other individuals with different positions.
In the survey, whether or not the physical conditions of people have been considered. Has the performance of people sleeping more than 6 hours been considered? It is possible that the disparities in the results between the two groups of people are not significant. As a result, the consideration of this subject as a factor in choosing employees can be wrong. This is because sometimes this factor can cause employers to lose a better workforce. The consideration of such a factor is not good because other factors, such as work experience, IQ, university qualification and other merits, can be more useful and fair for the assessment of an individual’s ability for employment.
There is no evidence about the factors considered in the survey. We do not know about the kind of factor used in the survey. We do not know whether the factors used for the analysis of the survey are correct or not. This type of obscurity can easily question the validity of the survey. There are no statistical figures for the survey done. This situation can cause referees to assume that the survey has been done just based on some empirical experiences without any scientific proof.
There is no mention of the number of companies used in the survey. We cannot exactly fathom whether the number used was enough or not. Also, the writer has not pointed out the type of companies. We do not know whether the companies used had the same work context or not. Another question is whether the samples used in the survey were comparable. Also, we do not know about the tools used in the survey for assessment.
In conclusion, the argument mentioned by the writer had been more valid if he would have used more information to resolve all obscurities and weaknesses in the survey. The connection between the need of individuals for sleep and their performance in this survey is questionable because the results are not based on persuasive information.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 30 15
No. of Words: 484 350
No. of Characters: 2372 1500
No. of Different Words: 200 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.69 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.901 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.83 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 165 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 123 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 68 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.133 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.136 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.267 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.312 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.312 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.154 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 16, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...h different positions. In the survey, whether or not the physical conditions of people have ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 79, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had used'?
Suggestion: had used
...by the writer had been more valid if he would have used more information to resolve all obscuri...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, if, so, in conclusion, kind of, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.6327345309 148% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2428.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 484.0 441.139720559 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01652892562 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69041575982 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92395596333 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.419421487603 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 783.9 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 19.7664670659 152% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.5512859352 57.8364921388 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 80.9333333333 119.503703932 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1333333333 23.324526521 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.46666666667 5.70786347227 43% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => 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: 13.0 4.67664670659 278% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.100079863678 0.218282227539 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0304592721988 0.0743258471296 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0496238546819 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0659841621111 0.128457276422 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0587886352362 0.0628817314937 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 14.3799401198 72% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.54 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.82 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.