A recent study by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention found that employees with paid sick leave are 28 percent less likely to be involved in a work-related accident than employees who do not receive payment for sick leave. Researchers hypothesize that employees with unpaid sick leave feel pressured to work during time of illness for fear of lack of pay. On-the-job accidents are then spurred by impaired judgment or motor skills due to illness or illness-related medications. The highest-risk occupations, such as construction, showed the highest discrepancy between paid and unpaid leave.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to determine whether the researchers’ hypothesis is reasonable. Be sure to explain what effects the answers to these questions would have on the validity of the hypothesis.
The author with a some evidences tries to claim that workers having an unpaid sick leave tend to have higher chances of working when they are in ill and in turn becoming more susceptible to job related accidents. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, reveals several instances of poor reasoning and ill-defined terminology, and distorts the view of the situation by misrepresenting facts and providing weak examples. To support the argument the author reasons that fearing the lack of pay, sick employees will feel pressured to work, causing a higher risk of on-job accidents. However, on scrutiny of the evidence will reveal that it provides little credible support to the author’s conclusion. Hence the argument seems unsubstantiated and requires exhaustive research to eliminate other possibilities and bolster the credibility of the argument.
Firstly, author’s largest leap in this argument seems that the employees with unpaid sick leaves tend to feel pressured to work even when they are ill. No evidence is given to support or second this hypothesis. In order to strengthen this part of the argument the researchers had ought to create a study of all the work related accidents where the ask the participants whether they have come in ill during the period of the original study and, if so, then why choose to come to work when you are ill? If this study had gone onto show that a significant number of employees came in due to the fear of lack of pay, then this would have gone on to enormously help the argument.
The researchers could have build up their argument by addressing the alternate explanations for the original study. For instance, they could addressed the backup and evidence for the assumption that 28% rise in the work related accidents is caused due to illness. They could have conducted a test to collect data to check the number of incidents due to incidents. Along with this for example, are hourly waged employees have a lesser chance of having a paid leave in comparison to salaried employees? Does the number of instances have any correlation to the job title or level of the employee? Is there a higher chance of manual occupations have a higher chance of having a sick work related to accident juxtaposed with the desk or indoor jobs. In such cases, the chances of having higher work related accidents can be due the inherently dangerous nature of the work and might not have anything to do with the choice of leaves.
Furthermore when the author claims the 28% number, then the data is presented lacks depth in detail causing an issue in analysing the significance of the provided data. How many people were surveyed? What was the margin of error? How statistically significant is the 28%? Say if the research is conducted over a myriad participants over various verticals, regions and job responsibilities then 28% is a huge number and it conveys something significant. On the other hand if the study has been done on a small target group with low variance then this represents a small number of participants and it makes the argument less severe. Moreover, unpaid sick leaves can also mean that the particular employee is indispensable asset to the team and they can’t spare you on a short notice.
While the argument provided is an interesting hypothesis, the data presented could have been more exhaustive in order to convince the reader. In conclusion, the author’s arguments seem unpersuasive as it stands To bolster it further, the author should have more concrete evidence and analysis for hypothesis being a good use of time and attention.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-09-24 | KnockingOn | 63 | view |
| 2022-05-04 | jdkarmakar2021@gmail.com | 82 | view |
| 2021-11-09 | Prash | 50 | view |
| 2021-10-25 | bonfireofbunnies@aol.com | 50 | view |
| 2021-08-08 | Adz12345 | 58 | view |
- All the parents should require to volunteer time at their children s school Write a response in which you can discuss the extent to which you agree and disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and 66
- Altruism is a type of behavior in which an animal sacrifices its own interest for that of another animal or group of animals Altruism is the opposite of selfishness individuals performing altruistic acts gain nothing for themselves Examples of altruism ab 83
- 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 66
- These days if you pick up a newspaper or turn on the TV or radio you may hear or read about the advantages of driverless cars also called self driving or autonomous cars The technology is simple to understand using sensors and computers these cars can dri 83
- Some people claim that the nation s government should preserve its wilderness areas in the natural state Others argue that these areas should be developed for potential economic gain 83
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 610 350
No. of Characters: 2956 1500
No. of Different Words: 276 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.97 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.846 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.735 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 207 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 150 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 116 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 74 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.522 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 16.202 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.522 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.284 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.489 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.086 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 729, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ble support to the author’s conclusion. Hence the argument seems unsubstantiated and ...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 345, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...of all the work related accidents where the ask the participants whether they have come...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 143, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'address'
Suggestion: address
...riginal study. For instance, they could addressed the backup and evidence for the assumpt...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
...hing to do with the choice of leaves. Furthermore when the author claims the 28% number, ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 562, Rule ID: SMALL_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, use 'a few', or use 'some'
Suggestion: a few; some
... with low variance then this represents a small number of participants and it makes the argument ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, however, if, moreover, second, so, then, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 87.0 55.5748502994 157% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3021.0 2260.96107784 134% => OK
No of words: 610.0 441.139720559 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.95245901639 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.96972615649 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80412651353 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 286.0 204.123752495 140% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.468852459016 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 940.5 705.55239521 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.4118425061 57.8364921388 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.84 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4 23.324526521 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.96 5.70786347227 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.185402961194 0.218282227539 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0555047638538 0.0743258471296 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0552195162112 0.0701772020484 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101780773529 0.128457276422 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0575315272844 0.0628817314937 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 98.500998004 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 12.3882235529 149% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.