argument161欢迎拍文作文修改小组7月14日作业

dsndiziUID: 2792853

TOPIC: ARGUMENT161 - In a study of reading habits of Leeville citizens conducted by the University of Leeville, most respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a follow-up study conducted by the same researchers found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel. Therefore, it can be concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits.

Merely based on the unsounded assumptions and dubious evidences, the arguer draws a conclusion that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits, as in fact they might prefer mystery novel. Although the conclusion seems to be convincing and appealing in the fist glance, while it is actually ill-received as it is flawed and defective, from my perspective, the argument at least has three flaws.

First and foremost, the credibility and generalization of the survey are questionable. it is obvious that there are two investigations cited above, while the article's author fails to inform us how many people were studied and did responded, suppose if one hundred citizens are investigated while only ten of them gave an answer, the result statistically to be unreliable, what's more if the citizens conducted by the research are telling the real opinion of their own, if the questions are leading, factors such as these would not only redefine but also might undermine the assumption.

In the second place, even if the studies turn out to be reliable to support the foregoing assumptions, the author unfairly assumes that citizens might prefer mystery novels simply based on the second survey. Despite people's interest which may lead more borrows and returns of mystery novel, it is equally possible that alternative explanations can also play a role in such conclusion. for example, it is reasonable to wonder if people prefer to buy literary classics in bookstores meanwhile like borrow mystery novels in library, there is no solid evidence to eliminate such probability. on the other hand, what if it is due to the shortage of mystery novel that people can read through them quickly so that they have to check out these novels more frequently. Lacking such alternative possibilities and firm evidence to uphold the speaker's claim, there is no guaranty for us to wholly accept the conclusion.

finally and may be the most importantly, the arguer fails to make a comparison between the first survey to the second survey, even we justify the result of the second survey can represent the fact that people are more likely to read mystery novels. Because the time when these two surveys were conducted is not reigns the same period of time, it can not be denied there is a casual popularity of mystery novel for a short time, and a short-lived phenomenon can not stand for the whole and long-term people's reading interest. In this sense, the arguer fails to take into casual factors into account and hasty to draw the conclusion.


In conclusion, the argument that the citizens in Leeville prefer reading mystery novels rather than literature classics, while is seems logical at first, fails to substantiate strong and credible support to what the author indicates. In order to make the conclusion much more thorough and acceptable, the argument could be improved by providing evidence the reason people borrow more mystery novels results from their reading interest. It could be further improved by ruling out alternative explanations for the supposed casual relationship.