The twenty-year study on headaches of the citizens of Mentia revealed that the growth of salicylates usage in food production correlated with a steady decline in the average number of headaches. It was concluded that as the food-processing companies implement new possible usages of the above-mentioned chemical, an average citizen of Mentia will suffer a fewer number of headaches. However, scrutiny of this conclusion renders it untenable unless certain evidence is provided.
First of all, it is essential for the evaluation of the argument to know more details regarding the model used in the study. More precisely, the following questions must be answered: 1) how was the data collected?; 2) were the chosen participants representative and what was the number of them?; 3) is the correlation coefficient high enough? It is entirely possible, that the number of participants was small and, therefore, the obtained results cannot be applicable for the whole population of Mentia. Most importantly, we should be provided the correlation coefficient to analyze the soundness of this conclusion.
Secondly, the authors of the study must prove that the decline was not the result of a better environmental state of the city or other changes that could influence people’s health and well-being, such as a state of Mentia’s economy or laws related to labor. We should know how and to what extent all these factors may affect people’s health and have access to the twenty-year statistics.
Finally, in order to bolster the argument, the study must state the number of salicylates in foods and prove that it is significant to impede headaches. For that matter, perhaps processed food contains a neglectable amount of above-mentioned substance and, as a result, has no effect on preventing headaches. Accordingly, without having any proof, no conclusion with a high degree of certainty can be drawn from this study.
In the final analysis, the conclusion presented in the study is unconvincing as it stands since it lacks supporting facts and evidence. To bolster the argument, the authors of the study must provide us with the high level of correlation, a proof that the sample was representative and that other factors did not have any influence on the health of citizens.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 366 350
No. of Characters: 1857 1500
No. of Different Words: 181 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.374 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.074 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.004 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 140 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 105 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 81 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 58 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.143 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.416 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.571 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.345 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.612 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.109 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, finally, first, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, such as, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1927.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 366.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2650273224 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37391431897 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17309116945 2.78398813304 114% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 204.123752495 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.513661202186 0.468620217663 110% => OK
syllable_count: 596.7 705.55239521 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.3552035802 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.642857143 119.503703932 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1428571429 23.324526521 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.35714285714 5.70786347227 164% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
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: 0.135610990153 0.218282227539 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0470044361551 0.0743258471296 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0475469253701 0.0701772020484 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0749365021422 0.128457276422 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0414777173083 0.0628817314937 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.3799401198 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.