NADE.6424.cp09.p381-431.vpdf 2/23/04 10:58 AM Page 389
Cause-Effect
389
to the other extreme and being reluctant to take a stand on the issues. If
you’ve thought carefully about causes and effects, you have a right to state
your analysis with conviction. Don’t undercut the hard work you’ve done by
writing as if your ideas were unworthy of your reader’s attention.
REVISION STRATEGIES
Once you have a draft of the essay, you’re ready to revise. The following
checklist will help you and those giving you feedback apply to cause-effect
some of the revision techniques discussed on pages 60–62.
✓ CAUSE-EFFECT: A REVISION/PEER REVIEW CHECKLIST
❏
Revise Overall Meaning and Structure
❏ Is the essay’s purpose informative, persuasive, speculative, or a combination of these?
❏ What is the essay’s thesis? Is it stated specifically or implied? Where?
Could it be made any clearer? How?
❏ Does the essay focus on causes, effects, or both? How do you know?
❏ Where has correlation been mistaken for causation? Where is the
essay weakened by post hoc thinking?
❏ Where does the essay distinguish between primary and secondary
causes and effects? Do the most critical causes and effects receive special attention?
❏ Where does the essay dwell on the obvious?
Revise Paragraph Development
❏ Are the essay’s paragraphs sequenced chronologically or emphatically? Could they be sequenced more effectively? How?
❏ Where would signal devices make it easier to follow the progression
of thought within and between paragraphs?
❏ Which paragraphs would be strengthened by vivid examples (such as
statistics, facts, anecdotes, or personal observations) that support the
causal analysis?
Revise Sentences and Words
❏ Where do expressions like as a result, because, and therefore mislead
the reader by implying a cause-effect relationship? Would words such
as following and previously eliminate the problem?
❏ Do any words or phrases convey an arrogant or dogmatic tone (there
is no question, undoubtedly, always, never)? What other expressions
(most likely, probably) would improve credibility?