【09GRE作文冲刺组】yanxin19 3月2日作文A

yanxin19UID: 2254573

The author concludes that the Leeville citizens preffer mystery novel than literary classics as reading. To substantiate this advoacateion, two studies are cited, one is held in University of Leeville, the other is public libraries in Leeville, in addition, the author thoroughly throw down the first study. Even the author analoguesd these studies, and well organized his thesis, this assertion about Leeville citizens' reading inclinationinclience suffers from several logical flaws in critical respects, which render it unpersuasive as it stands. To the first point, the sample pools of the two studies may totally different in amount and attitude inclination, even the speaker mentions both of them as " Leeville citizens". It is entirely possible that the first study conducted in University of Leeville mostly involoves intellected university students, probrably, many students who are specified in classic literature involved. While, the survey conducted in public libraries contains more common citizen readers. In this case it provides alternate explanation for the different results of the two studies. To the second point, neither measure of reading habits in both the two studies is confidential indication of reading prefference, and a analogue between them is not sufficient to ensure any statistic value. The first survey is deiscribed by the subjects themselves, while the follow up study is measured check-out frequency of library. For the common citizens, it is possible that the mystery novels in the liabrary of Leexille are scarce so their circumstance is quicker. More, Possiablly, the university students believe they like classic for social approval instinct?, nevertheless, they more enjoy mysterious or huomorous literatures, or even do not like literature works at all. Without ruling out these possibilities, it is too harsty for the author to conclude that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits. To the last point, there is an overlap between literary classics and mysterious novels which will 混淆 the founding of the two studies. To sum up, the assertion that the Leeville citizens tend to read mystery novel rather than literary classics as reading is unconvincing, as least based on the text. To better evaluate the confidence of the studies, an identity criteria must be introduced. Moreover, the subjects of the studies should be examined carefully an eliminate some alternative variables.