The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company.
"According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actually increased during the past year. Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers. Thus, the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available. Super Screen should therefore allocate a greater share of its budget next year to reaching the public through advertising."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The world today is inundated heavily with advertising from all types of businesses. While data must prove that advertising is worthy of the investment, the argument presented by the advertising director for Super Screen Movie Production Company is flawed. It relies heavily on correlation implying causation and uses a sample size to support the argument that may not be statistically significant.
The first error this argument makes is by using small sample size to make a larger point. The director states that fewer people are attending Super Screen movies, yet the percent of positive reviews has increased. Naturally, when the sample size of a group decreases, the amount by which there is percent increase and decrease is much greater. For example, say 100 people went to a Super Screen movie, the percentage point by which a single person causes an increase or decrease in positive reviews is merely one. Whereas if only 10 people went to the Super Screen movie, the percentage point by which a single person causes an increase or decrease is ten. This causes a massive difference when interpreting the data. Therefore, in order to use this as supporting evidence for increasing Super Screen's advertising budget, the sample size of this data needs to be statistically significant.
The second error this argument makes is that correlation implies causation. The director argues that it is the lack of advertising that is causing the decrease in number of viewers, without providing any further evidence that this is indeed the cause. There could in fact be a myriad of reasons why people are not viewing Super Screen-produced movies. The director would be wise to back this claim up with supporting evidence. This evidence could perhaps come in the form of a poll. The director could poll a sampling of people whether or not they had seen any Super Screen advertising in the past day, week, month, etc. If the majority of people replied that they had not seen any recent advertising, this could support the director's argument. Further supporting evidence could then stem from a follow-up survey asking the same sample, to list their priorities when it comes to choosing a movie to view. If the majority replied that the movies they see are based on the advertisements, this would be additional evidence for the director's argument. In conclusion, the director provides no evidence to back up his claim that the reason for decreased viewership is due to lack of advertising. The potential strageties provided above could bolster and provide the necessary support.
The advertising director's argument for increased spending in the advertising budget is based on several fallacies. The director does not account for changes in percentages due to sample size and relies heavily on correlation impling causation.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-29 | Eurus Psycho Version | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | riyarmy | 54 | view |
| 2023-08-14 | Saket Choudhary | 68 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | Fahim Shahriar Khan | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-11 | Tanvi Sanandiya | 55 | view |
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected However since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations we cannot permit i 68
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree wi 83
- All too often companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees such consultants would be unnecessary 58
- The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Super Screen Movie Production Company According to a recent report from our marketing department during the past year fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies than in any ot 60
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 459 350
No. of Characters: 2318 1500
No. of Different Words: 203 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.629 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.05 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.742 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 174 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 128 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 95 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.864 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.198 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.545 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.306 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.473 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.079 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 529, 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
...irector could poll a sampling of people whether or not they had seen any Super Screen advertis...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 726, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...ent advertising, this could support the directors argument. Further supporting evidence c...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 746, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Further,
...s could support the directors argument. Further supporting evidence could then stem fro...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1030, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'directors'' or 'director's'?
Suggestion: directors'; director's
...is would be additional evidence for the directors argument. In conclusion, the director p...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 116, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...g budget is based on several fallacies. The director does not account for changes i...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, may, second, so, then, therefore, whereas, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2365.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 459.0 441.139720559 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15250544662 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62863751936 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81169012507 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 204.123752495 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.455337690632 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 738.0 705.55239521 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.76447105788 183% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.2697830771 57.8364921388 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.826086957 119.503703932 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9565217391 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.17391304348 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => 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: 0.23268118522 0.218282227539 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0713680185274 0.0743258471296 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0712036926934 0.0701772020484 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142018304245 0.128457276422 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0536368943725 0.0628817314937 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.3799401198 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => 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.