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."
The following argument is flawed for numerous reasons. Primarily, the argument is based on the unwarranted assumptions that recent report from indicates that fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies during the past year than in any other year, rendering its main conclusion that in order to have more people attend their movies Super Screen should allocate large budget next year to reaching the public through advertising, invalid.
The argument fails to provide any justification that fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies during the past year than in any other year. The memo never gives the number of people who attended the movies in the past year and in any other year. Even if the argument provides the information, it is still lacking because the number of times Super Screen-produced movies is made available for viewing also play a vital role in determining the number of viewers.
The argument also leaves many other unanswered questions. The percentage of positive reviews increased during the past year but the memo never cites any evidence to support this claim. The director could do something as simple yet effective as consulting a town librarian to review published study to show whether a parallel exists between reduced number of movies reviewers and increased positive reviews. The director could also hire an independent research firm to determine whether a correlation exists between increased number of movie viewers and reduced positive reviews.
Finally, the argument claims without warrant that the public's lack of awareness about availability of high quality movie is the main problem for inadequate positive contents reviews from viewers. Here again, research is a vital ally in the director case: Did all reviewers attend the movie? is the company's mode of accessing positive reviews too strict? Answering questions like these may help to clarify a solution to the Company problem.
Because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, it fails to make a convincing case that since recent report indicates that fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies during the past year than in any other year then Super Screen should allocate large budget next year to reaching the public through advertising so more people can attend their movie.
| 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 |
- Students are more responsible for their educations than are their teachers 50
- The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment 50
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other field is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition 50
- The first step to self knowledge is rejection of the familiar 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 50
Comments
e-rater score report
try to find 3 - 4 "flaws" from essay topics in which we think there are enough evidence.
=========================
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 361 350
No. of Characters: 1920 1500
No. of Different Words: 167 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.359 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.319 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.674 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 154 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 109 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.769 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 15.232 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.538 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.408 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.655 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.185 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 124, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ased on the unwarranted assumptions that recent report from indicates that fewer ...
^^
Line 5, column 186, 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.
...tes any evidence to support this claim. The director could do something as simple y...
^^^
Line 5, column 408, 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.
...viewers and increased positive reviews. The director could also hire an independent...
^^^
Line 7, column 292, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Is
...se: Did all reviewers attend the movie? is the companys mode of accessing positive...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, if, may, so, still, then, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 19.6327345309 36% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1956.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 361.0 441.139720559 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.41828254848 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35889894354 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71168357281 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.487534626039 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 613.8 705.55239521 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 103.102386203 57.8364921388 178% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.714285714 119.503703932 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7857142857 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.21428571429 5.70786347227 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.431106860399 0.218282227539 197% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142774469893 0.0743258471296 192% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.140206015679 0.0701772020484 200% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.260540088749 0.128457276422 203% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.130363671816 0.0628817314937 207% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.0 14.3799401198 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.5979740519 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.