The following is from an editorial in the Midvale Observer, a local newspaper.
"Ever since the 1950's, when television sets began to appear in the average home, the rate of
crimes committed by teenagers in the country of Alta has steadily increased. This increase in
teenage crime parallels the increase in violence shown on television. According to several
national studies, even very young children who watch a great number of television shows
featuring violent scenes display more violent behavior within their home environment than do
children who do not watch violent shows. Furthermore, in a survey conducted by the Observer,
over 90 percent of the respondents were parents who indicated that prime-time
television--programs that are shown between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m.---should show less violence.
Therefore, in order to lower the rate of teenage crime in Alta, television viewers should
demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time."
This editorial concludes that increasingly violent television programming during prime time in the country of Alta is responsible for the steady increase in violent crime among Alta's teenagers. To support this conclusion the editorial cites various statistical studies about violence on television. However, this evidence provides little credible support for the editorial's conclusion.
To begin with, the editorial observes a correlation between violence on television and violent teenage crime, then concludes that the former is the cause of the latter. However, the editorial fails to rule out other possible explanations for the rise in violent crime among teenagers. For example, since the 1950s it is entirely possible that Alta has seen a large growth in its population, or a deterioration of its juvenile justice system or economy. Any of these factors, or other social, political or economic factors, might lead to an increase in violent crime among teenagers. Without ruling out all other such factors it is unfair to conclude that television programs are responsible for this increase.
Next, the editorial cites studies showing that young children exposed to violent images are more likely to behave violently in the home. This evidence would support the editorial's conclusion only if teenagers and younger children react similarly to television. However, common sense tells me that young children are more likely than teenagers to mimic observed behavior. Moreover, the editorial fails to provide any evidence that this sort of mimicry ultimately develops into violent criminal behavior.
The editorial then cites the Observer survey in which "90% of the respondents were parents" who would prefer less violent television programming during prime time. However, the editorial fails to provide any information about the survey population; therefore it is impossible to determine whether the survey results apply generally to the Alta population. In addition, we are not informed how many parents were surveyed but did not respond. The greater this number, the less reliable the survey. Thus, as it stands the Observer study is statistically unreliable and lends no credible support to the editorial's conclusion.
Aside from the survey's statistical unreliability, in citing the survey the editorial assumes that parents' preferences about television programming have some bearing on whether their teenage children will commit violent crimes. However, the editorial provides no evidence to link one with the other. Moreover, the survey is relevant only to the extent that teenagers watch television during prime time. However, the editorial provides no evidence about this extent.
In conclusion, the editorial is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the editorial's author must rule out all other possible factors contributing to the rise in teenage violence. The author must also show that teenagers react to violent television images similarly to how younger children react to the same images, and that Alta teenagers watch a significant amount of television programming during prime time. In order to better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about the Observer survey population, and about the percentage of those surveyed who responded.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-12-29 | tahmeed1993 | 82 | view |
- Investments in life saving technology are more valuable than investments in technology related to entertainment or luxury 32
- Today culture is becoming more or less similar all around the world. Is it a positive or negative trend? 84
- Write a letter to your local council about the state of the sport club facilities and request more facilities suitable for people of your age.- Describe your sport club facilities.- What facilities are required?- Explain why people of your age need these 84
- The surest indicator of a great nation is not the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but the general welfare of all its people. 16
- Next month you are coming to Britain to study at a university in Scotland On the way you have a two day stop over in London You need accommodation for one night and you would like to use this time to see as much as possible of London You will need to use 93
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 499 350
No. of Characters: 2736 1500
No. of Different Words: 209 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.726 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.483 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.76 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 223 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 182 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 129 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 79 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.96 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.241 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.64 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.346 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.55 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.093 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 364, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'editorials'' or 'editorial's'?
Suggestion: editorials'; editorial's
...rovides little credible support for the editorials conclusion. To begin with, the edito...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 170, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'editorials'' or 'editorial's'?
Suggestion: editorials'; editorial's
...e home. This evidence would support the editorials conclusion only if teenagers and younge...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 610, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'editorials'' or 'editorial's'?
Suggestion: editorials'; editorial's
...le and lends no credible support to the editorials conclusion. Aside from the surveys s...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, moreover, similarly, so, then, therefore, thus, for example, in addition, in conclusion, sort of, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2814.0 2260.96107784 124% => OK
No of words: 499.0 441.139720559 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63927855711 5.12650576532 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72634191566 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8467327119 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.442885771543 0.468620217663 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 905.4 705.55239521 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.22255489022 237% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.4177818575 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.56 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.96 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.4 5.70786347227 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.138944514193 0.218282227539 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0451345238762 0.0743258471296 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0327582009196 0.0701772020484 47% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0861805285884 0.128457276422 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0246030788534 0.0628817314937 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.3799401198 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 48.3550499002 73% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.43 12.5979740519 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 98.500998004 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 12.3882235529 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.