Thursday, January 24, 2013

Statement Analysis Quiz: Product Review

Statement Analysis is applied to everything, including comments, emails, and even product reviews.  Many of us rely on product reviews at places like Amazon to help steer our purchasing. 

Here is a product review with the actual product name changed.  The subject is warning potential customers against buying this product by describing an incident to readers that will show that the product is poorly made.  

Test for readers:

What does Statement Analysis say about this review?  POLL FOLLOWS 

Hint:  Use statement analysis principles only.  Remember, you are not looking at reality, but "verbalized reality."  This means that you will not take a product and drop it from knee length to see if the results are the same, nor would you dismiss something such as a product being destroyed by a fall like this.  This is useful, but it is not Statement Analysis.  

Post your  analysis and your conclusion:  Is the writer truthful or not?  Answer the poll question and use the comments section to support your finding. 



I have a tale of woe for you.

I preordered a (product) ages ago and waited patiently for it. It looked superb, and was awesomely bright.

Then literally 6 hours after it arrived I had the misfortune if the lanyard slipping out of my hand and with a sickening crack it fell straight onto a concrete floor. Bezel first. 

After I'd finished crying I looked at the wreck. It was totally ruined, lens smashed, bezel bent over double, anodizing stripped off. But what struck me was the apparent lack of robustness. The actual light had been about knee height when I dropped it, and yet it was totaled...not exactly 2 meter impact resistant. Also, I know the bezel is thin but it still shouldn't be that soft. It was like mild steel, and it bent in between my fingers with minimal pressure. 
Obviously build quality is not as good on this light as I thought."



Was the writer truthful?
  
pollcode.com free polls 

34 comments:

Yukari said...

- right in the beginning he refers to his review as "a tale"!

- there are several embellishing elements that make this a "tale", a narrative, rather than a factual account: "I preordered a (product) ages ago and waited patiently for it... I had the misfortune ... with a sickening crack it fell... After I'd finished crying I looked at the wreck. ... But what struck me..."

- "I preordered a (product) ages ago and waited patiently for it." > additional information
> introduction of emotions right at the beginning of the statement

"It looked superb"
> it looked fine, but was it? Was the item undamaged?

"Then literally 6 hours after it arrived I had the misfortune if the lanyard slipping out of my hand and with a sickening crack it fell straight onto a concrete floor."
> passive language. The item is blamed.
> "Then": temporal lacunae. We can´t be certain what happened in the 6 hours (why the exact time frame?) between the arrival and the "misfortune". Did the light get damaged during this time? "Bezel first".
Attention drawn to the bezel. Was it already bent before it fell?

"The actual light had been about knee height when I dropped it, and yet it was totaled...not exactly 2 meter impact resistant. "

> change of language from passive to active: "I dropped it"
> change of language: for the first time since the beginning of the statement, he refers to "the actual light" - before it is always distancing language, "it" or even "the wreck".

Why "the actual light"? Is there a virtual/apparent/non-actual" light as well?

"Also, I know the bezel is thin but it still shouldn't be that soft. It was like mild steel, and it bent in between my fingers with minimal pressure. Obviously build quality is not as good on this light as I thought."

Also, ... > is additional information, sets the following sentences apart from the account of dropping the light.

Here, he reveals that he actively exerted pressure (even if minimal) on the bezel. He does not say when this happened. Did he handle the item roughly on purpose to test if it´s as sturdy "as he thought"?

I get the impression that the writer handled the light rougher than it should be or would have been handled in regular use under average conditions. The drop may have been an accident or a continuation of this handling. Now he blames the quality of the product for not withstanding his handling.







JoJo said...

Peter, I have a question about "story telling. " I see many times on this blog that someone has used "story telling" in a statement. Does the fact that they are adding descriptions and detail in a way to entertain automatically mean they are being deceptive?

LisaB said...

S/he begins by referring to their "tale of woe" (i.e. "a story") and goes on to use the term "literally" and to refer to the "actual" light being "totally" ruined. I know that if I spent $300 on a light I would call the manufacturer to complain if it broke under the conditions described. This reaction would be "expected" while the poster's reaction is illogical.
The description of the damage is extreme, and not likely to be the result of such a short drop, as the complainant says "It was totally ruined, lens smashed, bezel bent over double, anodizing stripped off" Instead of saying "It was totally ruined. THE lens WAS smashed, THE bezel was bent over double, and THE anodizing WAS stripped off. Subject goes on to state that the bezel "bent between (their) fingers" which suggests that the damage to the bezel was done by the poster, and was not a result of the fall (note that the light "fell" as opposed to the light was "dropped," making their involvement in it seem more passive than it likely was.
How would a fall of 10" cause the bezel to "bend over double" and the anodizing to be "stripped off."
I believe this person either never bought this light, or bought it and dropped it from SIGNIFICANTLY higher than "knee height" or broke only the lens and made up the rest for dramatic effect. I also presume that if this damage DID occur as described, the person making the statement contacted the manufacturer or vendor and had the item replaced or repaired. If this had not happened, they certainly would have posted some photos to back up the warning about the flimsy construction of the product. This individual goes on to tell us that s/he threw this $300 NiteCore TM15 light into a river, so they can't provide proof of this incident.

Lulu said...

OT
http://durangoherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?aid=/20130123/NEWS01/130129818&template=mobileart

Dylan's maternal family, friends, and followers are quite convinced that Mark Redwine is responsible for Dylan's disappearance. Could you analyze Mark's statement?


“I firmly believe that this is just a misguided attempt to draw attention to me when the reality of the fact is, you know, we don’t know where Dylan is at,” he said. “I have no idea where Dylan is at. I have no involvement with where Dylan is at.”

BostonLady said...

A few things I picked up on.

First, the "Tale" of woe. So right there, they are setting the tone for a story.

Next, what happened in the 6 hours from the time the product arrived. The writer skips over this time.

The statement that the lanyard slipped from their hand - passive. Trying to sound like the person holding it has no responsibility in how the item fell.

Next the writer states it fell from knee height. This is deceptive. If it slipped from the hand, how did it also fall from knee height?

Deception noted.

C5H11ONO said...

I have a tale of woe for you.

I preordered a (product) ages ago and waited patiently for it.
--The writer is trying to let the reader now that the delivery service was not very good. This may be what triggered his complaint.

It looked superb, and was awesomely bright.
--Past tense reference, therefore it no longer looks good and is not just bright, but awesomely bright. Because the writer chose to accentuate bright it is a sensitive topic to the writer. Perhaps the bright light it emitted could have resulted in him dropping the product?

Then literally 6 hours after it arrived I had the misfortune if the lanyard slipping out of my hand and with a sickening crack it fell straight onto a concrete floor.
--If the writer actually wrote "I had the misfortune if the landyard slipping…" (then he/she didn’t write “I had the misfortune OF the landyard slipping.” Therefore we can’t believe the writer. Could the writer be writing because he/she is disappointed that it didn’t arrive on time and wanted to complain about the product so other people don’t purchase it. Therefore he had presented a “scenario” of what would happen if it were to fall and he accidentally inserted the “if” conditional word. He added unnecessary words. The floor would have worked well in the sentence, but the writer had the need to add concrete.

Bezel first.
--The writer didn’t say that the bezel fell first or landed first so we can’t assume it for him/her.

After I'd finished crying I looked at the wreck.
--The writer inserted emotions in the appropriate place which is a sign of storytelling. There is a change in reality here. The “it” became a “wreck” . Did it become a wreck after it fell, or only during story telling.

It was totally ruined, lens smashed, bezel bent over double, anodizing stripped off.
--The bezel was not only bent over, but bent over double. The bezel was sensitive to him. He didn’t say the lens “was” smashed or that the bezel “was” bent over double, or that the anodizing “had” stripped off. We can’t assume it.

But what struck me was the apparent lack of robustness.
--But refutes what he said earlier.

The actual light had been about knee height when I dropped it, and yet it was totaled...not exactly 2 meter impact resistant.
--The “light” (I don’t know what this product is, but I am thinking it is some sort of camera doohickey) It was “about” knee height, not that it was knee height. Now the writer says he dropped it, as opposed to earlier where he indicated that the lanyard had slipped. He says the actual light was about knee high, if it came with another part, that part may have been higher than the light.


Also, I know the bezel is thin but it still shouldn't be that soft. It was like mild steel, and it bent in between my fingers with minimal pressure. Obviously build quality is not as good on this light as I thought."
--The writer is trying to use words to convince you by using “obviously” (Is Casey Anthony the author?).

I think the writer dropped the camera from a height higher than he indicated. He is upset that he/she had to wait for it, and because of his carelessness, now wants to place blame on a poor “build” light. I also think the writer is a man.

Anonymous said...

OT:
Peter - I listened to the crimewire show that aired on Tuesday. Please revisit the 911 call from Patsy. Listen carefuly as she does not say "she's six years old, she's blonde, 'she's six". I believe what she actually said was, "She's six years old, she's gone, she's six". Which is equally disturbing as "gone" means also "dead". She already knew that Jon Benet was dead. Also, it is unexpected as a parent would have said, "she's six years old, she's missing!" Using "gone" would not be an option for a parent because it even would slightly resemble "death".

Anonymous said...

Patricia said ...

His expectations were high, he had to wait patiently because he was anticipating something excellent.

He says "It looked superb and awesomely bright"

It isn't clear if it looked superb and awesomely bright in the advertising used in the sale or when it arrived. I'll assume it is when it arrived since that is the only mention of it during the six hours that he had it prior to the fall. He was still impressed. He didn't mention using it or inspecting it until after the incident when the lanyard slipped from his hand and it fell. I see no problem with the passive language here, lanyards do slip and things fall because of it. He isn't evading responsibility, just saying what happened.

Mentioning a sickening crack makes perfect sense, we all know the sick feeling you get when you drop something ... you hope that maybe it's going to be okay but you fear the worst. He mentions noticing that it fell with the bevel first so he was looking while it fell and landed but it was the sound, that sickening sound, that confirmed his suspicions that it was going to be very badly affected by the fall.
At that point he mentions crying. I doubt that he or she truly cried about it but there is that intense moment in time ( however brief) when you are figuratively crying over what just happened. He knew at that point that it was " a wreck" and his inspection confirmed it. He gives specifics with one word to describe what happened to each part mentioned. He doesn't go overboard and he doesn't go into a rant over what a piece of crap it is, nor does he evade responsibility over it falling. He gives specifics that are appropriate. He then says that what struck him, a relatively subjective comment, was the apparent lack of robustness. I think it is fair that you wouldn't notice that type of thing until it is suddenly ruined, until then it was his new toy and still looked superb. He was anticipating it being a good product but after just one fall smashed it I can see how he would want to take a closer look. I would do the same. I have dropped cameras and phones and been surprised at how well they hold up to falls from waist level.
Again he gives specifics, probably the very ones he thought of as he inspected it, the bezel is thin ... but it probably shouldn't be such soft metal that it can easily be bent with your fingers. Sounds reasonable to me.
His conclusion is that the "build quality is not as good on this light as he had thought"
I believe him. Everything in the story is cohesive and appropriate. He takes responsibility for it falling, he acknowledges that he thought it seemed like a great product and then tells what happened and what his conclusions are. His conclusions are subjective and truthful, it is not the build quality that he, himself, had thought.
I don't see deception here.

ME said...

^^^^^^ your all trapped in your self gratious beliefs.

dadgum said...

gratuitous?

dadgum said...

you're

dadgum said...

'self righteous'?

Kaaryn Gough said...

"with a sickening crack it fell straight onto a concrete floor."

The telling of a story should reflect the reality of how it was experienced by the subject. According to the subject, he/she "hears" the result of the impact ("sickening crack") before it "fell onto a concrete floor". How could the "sickening crack" occur before the item impacted the floor? Not possible.

~ABC said...

ME said...
"^^^^^^ your all trapped in your self gratious beliefs."

~ABC says....
It's sad you are such an unhappy person. Your words are painful.

Anonymous said...

Please help find Ayla

In a phone interview Wednesday, Mark Redwine said the rally is an attempt by some to “PLAY JUDGE AND JURY.”
“I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT this is just a MISGUIDED ATTEMPT TO DRAW ATTENTION to me when THE REALITY OF THE FACT IS, YOU KNOW, WE don’t KNOW WHERE DYLAN IS AT,” he said. “I have no idea WHERE DYLAN IS AT. I HAVE no INVOLVEMENT WITH WHERE DYLAN IS AT.”

THE FACT IS:
we don’t know WHERE DYLAN IS AT
I have no idea WHERE DYLAN IS AT
I have no involvement with WHERE DYLAN IS AT.”
“Where Dylan is at” repeated three times shows sensitivity. Reported in the negative: “know…idea…involvement”

Anonymous said...

He felt he waited ages for it, so he did not wait patiently.
(Ivanna-Anna)

Peter Hyatt said...

Kaaryn Gough has left a new comment on your post "Statement Analysis Quiz: Product Review":

"with a sickening crack it fell straight onto a concrete floor."

The telling of a story should reflect the reality of how it was experienced by the subject. According to the subject, he/she "hears" the result of the impact ("sickening crack") before it "fell onto a concrete floor". How could the "sickening crack" occur before the item impacted the floor? Not possible.


Sometimes it is just right there beneath our noses!

Kaaryn, we have to get you back on Crime Wire!

Peter

Hobnob said...

Kaaryn Gough said...
"with a sickening crack it fell straight onto a concrete floor."

The telling of a story should reflect the reality of how it was experienced by the subject. According to the subject, he/she "hears" the result of the impact ("sickening crack") before it "fell onto a concrete floor". How could the "sickening crack" occur before the item impacted the floor? Not possible



Cooooeeeeeeeeeee
Hi kaaryn, happy new year
~flings a snowball~

This is akin to dead squirrels climbing under a car :)

Hobnob said...

Peter Hyatt said...
Kaaryn Gough has left a new comment on your post "Statement Analysis Quiz: Product Review":

"with a sickening crack it fell straight onto a concrete floor."

The telling of a story should reflect the reality of how it was experienced by the subject. According to the subject, he/she "hears" the result of the impact ("sickening crack") before it "fell onto a concrete floor". How could the "sickening crack" occur before the item impacted the floor? Not possible.


Sometimes it is just right there beneath our noses!

Kaaryn, we have to get you back on Crime Wire!

Peter


I heartily concur

I don't know about our noses, it wasn't below the subjects knees hehe

Lis said...

"I have a tale of woe for you."

[Okay, but does it have anything to do with this object for sale right here?

The person "has" a "tale" - not a review - "for you". ]

"I preordered a (product) ages ago and waited patiently for it. It looked superb, and was awesomely bright."

[Did the reviewer order *this* product from *this* site? (Ebay, for instance, is infamous for selling cheap knock-offs of name brand items.)

The receiving of the item is skipped over - they pre-ordered it and suddenly "it looked superb"

"The product" is now "it".

"Ages ago" - what is "ages" to this reviewer?

"Waited patiently" is unnecessary information - why is it important to the reviewer that we see him as patient? Is he impatient?

"It looked superb and was awesomely bright"- "superb" is an unusual word to use. I would have expected details here about the materials, the weight, the operation, etc. ]

"Then literally 6 hours after it arrived I had the misfortune if the lanyard slipping out of my hand and with a sickening crack it fell straight onto a concrete floor. Bezel first."

[ The reviewer is contrasting the "ages" he waited for the item with the "literally 6 hours" he enjoyed it before it was ruined, to gain our sympathy. But does this speak to the quality of the item?

"Then" is a flag. What happened between the product's arrival and the 6 hours later?

"Literally" is a flag. I would question whether it was literally 6 hours or what in the account is not literal.

The reviewer "had the misfortune" of ("if," actually - typo or Fruedian slip? lol) the "lanyard slipping out of my hand". I could see "I had the misfortune of dropping it" but, although the lanyard slipping off his hand seems to imply it, the reviewer does not actually say that he dropped it.

It is possible that the lanyard slipped off his hand, that he dropped it, and that something else happened to it, as well, all unconnected.

The item gave a "sickening crack" *before* it fell onto the concrete floor.

"Bezel first" is an incomplete sentence. The bezel is singled out. ]

"After I'd finished crying I looked at the wreck. It was totally ruined, lens smashed, bezel bent over double, anodizing stripped off. But what struck me was the apparent lack of robustness. The actual light had been about knee height when I dropped it, and yet it was totaled...not exactly 2 meter impact resistant. Also, I know the bezel is thin but it still shouldn't be that soft. It was like mild steel, and it bent in between my fingers with minimal pressure. Obviously build quality is not as good on this light as I thought."

[ "Crying" ?

"After" and "finished" are flags.

The person cried *before* examining the item to find out its condition.

The product was "totally ruined" from an implied straight drop from knee height, this seems unusual.

The "apparent" lack of robustness

The "actual light" - what was not actual?

The bezel is singled out and given more attention.

The product is now "the wreck."

The reviewer says, "what struck me..." Was the item used to strike something? ("Impact resistant" does not mean the product was manufactured for the purpose of striking things.)

"build quality is not as good on this light as I thought" - How good did the reviewer think the build quality was? Good enough to use it to strike something with? ]

Anonymous said...

I agree with everybody here. But I am new at this. I have questions. What if this person (I think female because men don't like to admit they cry) thought she was being amusing? Talking about breaking a light is a lot different than talking about a missing child. Do the same rules apply?
joan+22+1

BostonLady said...

Thank you Karen ! Someday maybe MAYBE I'll be able to better pick up on the nuances.

ME said...

~ABC your analysis is "painfull"no wonder your online 24/7 you're living alie.

~ABC said...

ME said...
~ABC your analysis is "painfull"no wonder your online 24/7 you're living alie

~ABC says...
Do you enjoy lashing out at strangers online? I'm always curious what causes people to be acid.

LisaB said...

Hobnob said: "This is akin to dead squirrels climbing under a car :)"

About two weeks ago, we got new chairs for some of the people in our office. The maintenance staff came to pick up the old ones. One of the men complained that the chair he was moving smelled horrible. He said (I swear, you can't make this stuff up) that "a dead mouse must have crawled up into it". It would have taken me too long to explain to him why I laughed.

ME said...

"TALE" means "story" you ALL MISSED IT.

Anonymous said...

Boston Lady, it was apparently dangling on a lanyard so the knee height makes sense.

Lis said...

The question of the reviewer's gender confuses me. I got mixed messages. The reference to crying would seem female (but kind of ridiculous even then) but some of the terms used like "mild steel" "anodizing" "robustness" seem more likely to be used by a male to me.

I think the person writes like a Nigerian spammer, ha ha!

How did you all read it and what made you decide one way or the other?

LisaB said...

"ME" apparently didn't read carefully as SEVERAL posters had already mentioned the tale=story connection. I tend to think the poster was male. Who else spends $300 on a flashlight?

Elaine said...

They say they have a TALE. So, they are about to tell a tale.

"It looked superb, and was awesomely bright." This seems important to the person but it not brought up again about being bright in the flaws.

The product was an IT until the very end when it became "this light".

Passive language is used to describe the entire event of the light slipping out of their hands and falling, etc.

They Preordered the light. Next sentence starts with THEN. Something is missing. Next sentence starts with AFTER "I'd finished crying" --again, something is missing.

OBVIOUSLY is used. We are supposed to know it is obvious. We do not know that.

My conclusion is it looked "superb and awesomely bright" and when they got it it was not what they expected and they threw it down and smashed it in a fit.

"After I'd finished crying I looked at the wreck" After their fit, they looked at the wreck of a product and wreck they made.

Aletheia said...

Eating a CAKE, Lisa? Say it ain't so! Because that would just ... invalidate ... everything!

(Faints in horror)

Hobnob said...

We have cake??

GIMME

Anonymous said...

Brokersring.com - Learn how to turn $500 into $5,000 in a month!

[url=http://www.brokersring.com/]Make Money Online[/url] - The Secret Reveled with Binary Option

Binary Options is the way to [url=http://www.brokersring.com/]make money[/url] securely online

Anonymous said...

Wow, incredible blog layout! How long have you been blogging for?
you make blogging look easy. The overall look of
your site is fantastic, as well as the content!



Look at my web blog; cedar finance system reviews