Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment Within that group of people 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots had not been wear

Essay topics:

Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment. Within that group of people, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots had not been wearing any protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.). Clearly, the statistics indicate that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, roller skaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident.

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.

It is concluded that roller skaters can greatly reduce their risk of being hurt severely by investing in good quality protective gears and reflective equipments. This conclusion is based on evidences like the hospital statistics of people going to emergency room after roller-skating accidents shows the need for more protective equipement. And also the statistics of a group of people indicate that 75 percent of those who had accident in street or parking lots had not been wearing any protective clothing etc. To state if this conclusion is cogent, the following 3 assumptions need to be answered first.

Firstly, it is stated that a hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment. Here, it there is no detailed information about the statistics. The statisics might have considered only one month's data. For instance, statistics can be done weekly, monthly or yearly. It is assumed here that is statistics is thorough. But we don't know that yet. Also, there could be a possibilty that in the statistical data the hospital might had seen 3-4 or little more emergency roller skate incidents and thus the assumption was made. Thus, we will needing more evidence on how and what all parameters were considered in the statistics.

Secondly, there is a mention of another statistics stating 75% of those who had accidents weren't wearing any protective equipments. The statistics is carried out within a group of people. There can be a possibility here that the group of people selected is very biased. For instance, suppose a survey is carried whether people like Taylor Swift or Katy Perry. In this, there can be a case where the survey being taken by more of TS fans than Katy Perry fans. Thus yielding a bias result. Just like that in this statistic there is a possibility of majority of people being in an accident without precautions equipments.

In addition to above, the group of people needs to be quantitatively defined. For example, out of 10 people, 7 love mangoes. Some quantitatve measure needs to be specified. It is assumed that a group of people means many number of people. But a group can be anything ranging from 3 to 3000. We don't specifically know if a small or large group is being referenced.

Therefore, the conclusion of lowering accidental risks of roller skater by investing in good quality protective accessories is in itself flawed. More evidence is needed to come to proper conclusion. In addition to the evidence required for the above mention assumptions, other evidences are helpful in proving the cogency of the conclusion.

Votes
Average: 5 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2023-09-09 Murad1234 68 view
2023-08-27 SanjanaB 50 view
2023-08-07 sam 27 66 view
2023-07-24 Technoblade 66 view
2023-06-03 challenge 55 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user SanjanaB :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 420, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... that is statistics is thorough. But we dont know that yet. Also, there could be a p...
^^^^
Line 2, column 631, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'need'
Suggestion: need
... the assumption was made. Thus, we will needing more evidence on how and what all param...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 92, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
... stating 75% of those who had accidents werent wearing any protective equipments. The ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 493, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... fans. Thus yielding a bias result. Just like that in this statistic there is a p...
^^
Line 4, column 217, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun number seems to be countable; consider using: 'many numbers'.
Suggestion: many numbers
...is assumed that a group of people means many number of people. But a group can be anything ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 295, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... be anything ranging from 3 to 3000. We dont specifically know if a small or large g...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, in addition

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2221.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 440.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04772727273 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57997565096 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90407860098 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 204.123752495 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.493181818182 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 702.9 705.55239521 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 19.7664670659 142% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.6918788278 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.3214285714 119.503703932 66% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.7142857143 23.324526521 67% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.25 5.70786347227 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => 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: 0.46892007262 0.218282227539 215% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110721354938 0.0743258471296 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.153217102434 0.0701772020484 218% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.256161312178 0.128457276422 199% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.165407191961 0.0628817314937 263% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 14.3799401198 71% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.3550499002 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.71 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.75 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 443 350
No. of Characters: 2167 1500
No. of Different Words: 217 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.588 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.892 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.835 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 154 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 121 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.407 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.04 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.556 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.277 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.277 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.089 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5