In
the article You Can’t Take It With You, But You Still Want More by Matt
Richtel, it says that we have a “deeply rooted instinct” that makes us work
harder for more even if we know we can consume it all. Many researchers have
notice that with the rise of productivity rates ideologically humans should be
able to work less than our ancestors but still be able to live just as
comfortably. A study was conducted that splitting up a group of people. These
people were told they could listen to 2 choices of music and if the chose the
louder music they could get chocolate. One group of people could listen to less
music and earn more chocolate. In the second part of the experiment when they could
eat the chocolate they earned, they were first asked to guess how many
chocolates they could consume most said around 4. When they got their
chocolates they earned almost triple.
I
thought this was a very interesting study because it says that we are working
more than necessary to get what we need to live comfortably. I think now that
more people know about this the amount of hours people spend working might go
down but I also think this could be a very hard habit to break.
This
article was really interesting to read, it taught me a lot about the human work
ethic and why some people are unhappy without even knowing why. While this
article had a lot of information it could still be a little hard to understand
at times. Overall it was a pretty good article.
Katie did a pretty good job writing this review. She included some detailed background on the experiment scientists performs on people. How they were trying to prove that humans work harder than they needed to live comfortably. She described how the scientists used music and chocolate in their experiment. Katie also added a good explanation paragraph on her thoughts of the article. She explained what she found interesting and what she learned from it. That paragraph can also help the reader get a summary of the whole article and Katie's views. Lastly Katie picked an article she really liked. She seemed really interested in the topic so she wrote a very interesting review.
ReplyDeleteAs well as Katie wrote this she could have improved. At some points in this review Katie used some words that were not easily understandable. It made it hard for me to understand what she was trying to explain to the reader. She could have used simpler words and the readers could understand her a little better. Another thing Katie could have improved is give more detail on what she learned and like. All she did was state what she like and learned but didn't expand on it.
I did not agree with the author of this article like Katie did. I think some people in the world want to leave more than comfortably. I believe this is ok if they want to dedicate their life to working hard and living a wonderful life. Katie overall did a very well job writing this review.
Katie did a good job at getting straight to the point of the article. Another thing she did a good job on was giving a reason for how the researchers got to their conclusion. She also did a good job on explaining how this can affect us. She stated that humans are willing to work more than they need to accomplish their goal and to live comfortably. One thing that could have made this report better would be explain more how the whole test on working hard works. For example, explaining the music part of the test more. A second thing that could have made this report better would be to show some numbers and some percentages of the amount of effort people put into their work and how comfortably they live. I never knew that so many people put more effort than needed to get what they want.
ReplyDeleteI thought that Katie chose a very interesting topic since we see it all around us in parents as well as students. I thought that Katie did a good job on providing the necessary information about the trial and who it was conducted on, rather than just giving the outcomes. I thought that this gave a better understanding to a topic of research that is quite difficult to understand. I also liked that Katie added that the article itself was somewhat unclear and hard to understand, which may explain why this experiment seems a little confusing and herd to follow. This shows me that it isn’t that Katie had an unclear understanding, but rather that it is just something rather difficult to grasp even when it is written very simply. I also liked the connections that Katie made to society how people work extremely hard and don’t need to because they could work less for a comfortable lifestyle.
ReplyDeleteI thought that this review was very well written but there were some areas that could have used a little bit of work. First off I thought that it could have been clearer by using the same vocabulary words when describing the trial. I found that you changes words. For example first she used earned, then get and then back to earned. She also used consume and earn interchangeably, and it would be more clear if she stuck to one word and only used that one. Another thing I thought Katie could have done better explain what she said about “productivity rates of ‘ideological humans.’” By expanding on what this means and how it ties into this story may help the reader to better understand.
Overall I thought that this was very well done, and I learned why so many people work hard even when they have an already comfortable life. On the contrary some people do like to have a surplus working hard to provide a great life for family, and not all people who spend lots of time working are miserable. Some people enjoy their jobs. I thought that this was very well written and thoroughly reviewed!
Katie did a good job in writing this review. One thing I liked was that she gave us a list of the experiments the scientists did to finally end up with this result. It gave the readers evidence on how the scientists have made this hypothesis and what are the reasons behind this result. Another thing I liked was the paragraph on where she wrote about how she thought about this article, and what she learnt from this article. One more thing she did well was that she went straight to the point, so it wasn’t confusing for the reader.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Katie did a good job, there are some things she could improve. One thing is that maybe she could have added some statistics on how many people agree with this conclusion, and the reasons behind this statement, only if it were given in the article. Another thing that she could have done would be that she could have given some recommendations to author on how he could have improved the article so that it would have been less confusing.
I think that this is a very interesting topic, especially because this argument is new to me. I am not on any side, but I do think that we still need to work very hard to get money, and do well in our lives. Overall, I think Katie did a good job!
Katie did a particularly interesting review on the article, “You can’t it with you, but you still want more.” One thing that a found Katie did exceptionally well was the amount of background information on the topic and also the amount of description of the topic was quite impressive. I also thought that Katie made an interesting point of telling her opinion on how the authors of the articles got to their final conclusion in the end. This section fascinated me because I don’t think I have read a review where the writer makes the next step and makes a hypothesis on something such as how the author of the article got to their conclusion. Finally, I was impressed with how Katie included all the information and a list of all the experiments performed by the scientists themselves.
ReplyDeleteAlthough this review in particular was presented well, there are some aspects that could have been improved upon. First of all, I think that some people may not know the definitions to some of the bigger words used in this review, such as ideological. So my suggestion would be to define any large words, regardless if you yourself know the definition or not. I also think that Katie could have backed up her information even more by adding some statistics and numbers of how many people said what in the experiment.
Over all, I would say that Katie did a very good job writing this review and that I was impressed with the overall amount of information Katie was able to include from the article.
There are many aspects if this review that are presented well. Here are only three. Katie did a great job of describing the experiment in her first paragraph. It seems like all the steps are included so the full picture is all there for the reader to see. Also, she makes a nice connection to our lives, and the article itself was applies not only to one group of people, but to everyone around the world. In addition to that, I like how Katie was able to weave in a quote from the article itself into the review. It’s always good to have quotes because they help to validate an author’s writing and information.
ReplyDeleteThis review was very good, but there were some things that could have been a bit better. For example, in the first paragraph when Katie is explaining the experiment conducted on two groups of people, it was a little hard to follow at some parts although it was still very descriptive. Also, the Katie could have incorporated some more transitional words or phrases into her review, and this would make it flow better and more easily.
There were many interesting and new facts that this article review brought to the table. I had no idea that people nowadays are working harder than they need to, and when I read this it came as a big surprise to me. It’s clear that Katie understood this article very well and was able to put together a solid review that presented a lot of valuable information.