argument161 欢迎拍文修改小组作业贴

raysun77UID: 2688235

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.
WORDS: 394
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-7-14 下午 08:20:11

In this article, the arguer concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits just for the different result in the two studies. It seems a convincing conclusion at the first glance. However, there are many fallacy flaws in the article.

First, the arguer concluded the conclusion for the reason that the follow-up study conducted by the same researchers was found different from the first study. Clearly, the arguer ignored the important point that there were two different groups which accepted the survey of reading habits. What's more, the arguer didn't prove the information that the location where the first group accepted the survey. As we know that the different groups of persons have the different habits which decide the location they prefer. It is entirely possible that the first study acted in the club that just for the old people or the classic fans. If that is the truth, the different between the two study is an absolutely result.

Even though, there was no any special for the respondents in the first study. The arguer shouldn't conclude the unconvincing conclusion, either. As our common sense, the citizen who preferred literary classics as reading material would like buy those books as their collection. If they have their own books, they doesn't borrow the classic books from the public libraries. However, the mystery novel, as one kind of public novel, has changed frequently. There always goanna be various books punished in one week. It is not necessary for the readers buy each books they want to read. In my opinion, this is
the main reason that caused the mystery novel is the most frequently checked out of each public libraries.


In addition, the arguer didn't tell us the number of the respondents in the first study. If the number of the respondents is too small, it cannot stand for the reading habits of all the citizen in the leeville.

In sum, the arguer concluded one unconvincing conclusion. Before the arguer provide more information, such as the more details and the current number of the respondents in the first study. I wouldn’t accepted the conclusion. Otherwise, the arguer should study the reading habits of the Leeville city in a convincing way, he should study amount of respondents and various factors which might undermine the conclusion in order to make a convincing one.

alickenUID: 2845947

In this article, the arguer concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits just for the different result in the two studies. It seems a convincing conclusion at the first glance. However, there are many fallacy flaws in the article.

First, the arguer concluded(改为deduces，conclude conclusion感觉怪怪的) the conclusion for the reason that the follow-up study conducted by the same researchers was found different from the first study. Clearly, the arguer ignored the important point that there were two different groups which accepted the survey of reading habits. What's more(此处用what’s more 不好，感觉像是要攻击另外一点了), the arguer didn't prove the information that the location where the first group accepted the survey. As we know that the different groups of persons have the different habits which decide the location they prefer. It is entirely possible that the first study acted in the club that just for the old people or the classic fans. If that is the truth, the different between the two study is an absolutely result. (加上: Therefore the arguer cannot conclude that the responders in the first study misrepresented their reading habits.)

Even though, there was no any special for the(in) respondents in the first study. The arguer shouldn't conclude(同上段，改为get) the unconvincing conclusion, either. As our common sense, the citizen who preferred literary classics as reading material would like buy(buying) those books as their collection(collections). If they have their own books, they doesn't(will not) borrow the classic books from the public libraries. However, (in contrast with literary classics,) the mystery novel, as one kind of public novel, has changed frequently. There always goanna be various books punished in one week. It is not necessary for the readers buy each books(book) they want to read. In my opinion, this is the main reason that caused the mystery novel is the most frequently checked out of each public libraries.

In addition, the arguer didn't tell us the number of the respondents in the first study. If the number of the respondents is too small, it cannot stand for the reading habits of all the citizen in the leeville.

In sum, the arguer concluded one unconvincing conclusion. Before the arguer provide more information, such as the more details and the current number of the respondents in the first study. I wouldn’t accepted(accept) the conclusion. Otherwise, the arguer should study the reading habits of the Leeville city in a convincing way, he should study amount of respondents and various factors which might undermine the conclusion in order to make a convincing one.

红色是语法错误，蓝色是建议。

作者这篇反驳的不错，先说可能是两次受访者不同造成了结果的不同，而不是调查的错误， 然后说不借经典文学书不代表不喜欢读书，可能读者自己买作收藏，最后攻击受访者样本小(这点论述 不足，可能是时间关系)。

另外，提供两个攻击点供参考：
1、作者只做了两次调查，仅仅从这两次调查的不同中他怎么知道是第一次调查错了而不是第二次？作者没有参照物，至少他还得做一次调查。(个人认为这才是这篇文章最应该攻击的地方)

2、可以攻击文中的 checked out，表示借出，可能图书馆的经典文学书比较珍贵，不允许外借，或者书太厚读者不愿意外借，就在图书馆里看。

个人观点仅供参考，共同努力

raysun77UID: 2688235

2# alicken
对呢，这两个反驳点我没有想到过，O(∩_∩)O谢谢

hyacinthUID: 2184492

maybe i was wrong, but i think there is no survey involved in the second study...

"found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel"

there could be different interpretations of this sentence though