2# aqule
不好意思,这几天有事.可以直接,我加你了
另外贴我的A200
It can never be more self-evident that if the dentists want to appeal to the would-be patients,he'll firstly find the target consumer and then show them how great their service is.However,what if the dentists mistaken the wrong group of consumer for their target?Or,if their service just isn't the consumers' cup of tea,maybe relatively or absolutely,what's the point in advertising? First of all,the arguer preclaims that the male consumer will be their customer at least if they are aware of the excellent staff and techniques they are equipped with.Several questions arise here:What's the frequency of the male consumers having dental disease now and then?Will the number of male patients overwhelm that of female ones?Are they looking for the higher level of anesthetic techniques or more attention and observation from the staff?Most practically,can they afford that kind of treatment even if they want it? Unfortunity,the statistics and reasoning based on them seem to be humbled by these questions.At the threshold,the higher faint rate of men compared with women is not equal to higher proportion of man than women in patients.There's good odds that the women that faint constitutes just one third of the total female patients while the men that faint make up the whole group of male patients.Moreover,even if the male consumer are qualified as the main customer of the dentists,whether they're interested in the program of the advertisement is still pending.In the light of the statistics,male consumer are more likely to faint,which does not necessarily result from and cannot lead to the distressment about dental work.It can happen that they are not used to the distinct smell of the medicine.Or maybe the majority of male consumers prefer not using anesthesia during the operation and that makes them tend to faint.So,the author's
reasoning is unwarranted.Last but not least,no evidence refers to the buying power of the patients.Therefore,more specific and thorough statatistics about the proportion of all the male and female consumers as well as some questionaires about their backgrounds is needed in order to make the argument more compelling. Still the conclusion works only if the root statistics was collected in the relevant range of time and place as with the dentists engaged in advertising.Cause the statistics from research conducted in Michigan through 1940-1950 have literally nothing to do with the advertisement for dentists dwell in California or Los Angeles in 21 century.At least one new generation can come into being in 50 years,not to mention the climate,geographical,historic and culture factors.One single change makes a big difference.But the ironic part is that we cannot find anything about when and where the data was gathered.Neither do we know anything about the dentists the author make suggestions to.Before the dentists are encouraged to sink money into advertising,a more comprehensive understanding of the statistics would be beneficial. This argument for dental advertisement based on statistics of patients could convey crucial information and potentially helps attract consumers.Whereas,more work on data collecting and data processing are needed before this proposal was turned into posters pasted hither and thither. |