The article presents a study involving thousands of pairs of twins and an analysis of each of their test scores from elementary school to high school. Throughout the article, it is emphasized that the twins' academic performance was influenced by their genetics and that the low grades were due to the student's personal stress and anxieties. The article concludes by mentioning a similar study conducted that found that a “test,” as well as the mother's genetics, could contribute to the child's potential success in life overall. While attempting to appeal to logic, Interrante fails to provide an adequate explanation of the study through an implicit assumption, inadequate presentation of facts, and an overall reliance on a summary that creates confusion for the audience. At first glance, Interrante seems quite influential in the presentation of the study. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Through further evaluation, however, Interrante assumes that his audience is ignorant and impressionable about the topic. Next, it assumes that the public will consider the research credible simply based on vague statements like: “[The researchers'] analysis found that academic success is very consistent, so children who do well in elementary school often continue to do well even in high school. school (interrant 2). It's unclear what “consistent” specifically means when it comes to children's grades; does it translate to “straight A” or simply their ability to pass? Below, Interrante uses “do well” to describe the rest of the children's academic careers and does not delve into the exact details of their performance. The article therefore relies heavily on repetition, with similarly formatted statements appearing over and over again. Interrante also indicates that he set a low standard for his audience with the absence of rhetorical devices; with such non-complex terms, the article makes little appeal to logic. Because the topic involves children, emotional and ethical language becomes crucial to in-depth understanding, which Interrante fails to provide. This results in insufficient description of the research and inability to provide information to the public. Furthermore, Interrante shows little effort in presenting legitimate facts from the study, making statements such as: “About two-thirds of individual differences in academic performance are explained by differences in children's DNA (Interrante 2). " Again, Interrante does not specifically define what the "differences" in the "individual" or DNA are, and does not provide a detailed account of how the researchers arrived at this conclusion. Below, Interrante tends to use a indefinite language in factual statements, such as “possibility” and “may,” which indicate a sense of uncertainty. In this way, Interrante does not seem to take the research or the public seriously; simply something controversial to discuss. Considering the article is aimed at parents with children in school, it seems reasonable that Interrante uses understandable language. However, it seems to trivialize the audience's intelligence by limiting itself to superficial statements, which leads to its reliance on a summary. Although the article is quite short, Interrante does not use the opportunity to provide a sophisticated presentation of the research, only scratching the surface of what the study may have actually entailed. Since the article tends towards an overview, Interrante does not believe that an authentic analysis is necessary for..