Some people feel that manufacturers and supermarkets have the responsibility to reduce the amount of packaging of goods. While others argue that customers should avoid buying goods with a lot of packaging.
There is a growing tendency among manufacturers to present their products in excess packaging and supermarkets exhibit them to attract customers, who are often lured by such products. In order to reduce the amount of packaging, all the parties involved in creating such a trend should make a joint effort in this direction.
Since many people today equate quality with superior packaging, companies would not often take the risk of reducing it for fear of losing their market share. However, branded companies that are already established in the market can experiment with simple covering, without the fear of losing the popularity of their products. But it has to be done with wide publicity through the media and the financial benefits should be passed on to customers, or else, it could sometime become counter productive. For example, multinational companies like ‘Colgate’ can successfully give up expensive packaging of their toothpastes with economical alternatives.
Similarly, customers also have a role to play, by showing greater interest towards items in simple packing. This would motivate increasing number of producers to pack their products using inexpensive materials. Super markets would also be encouraged to showcase such products with greater visibility.
On the other hand, the amount of packaging also indicates the need to ensure the durability, safety and freshness of products. For instance, most instant foods are packed in several layers using expensive materials like aluminium foil and superior plastic, with the purpose of longer shelf life. Hence, lighter packaging of products should be introduced only after taking these aspects into consideration.
In conclusion, manufacturers, supermarkets and customers have a collective role in reducing the amount of packaging of products.
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'similarly', 'so', 'as to', 'for example', 'for instance', 'in conclusion', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.275641025641 0.268076937826 103% => OK
Verbs: 0.150641025641 0.116061578633 130% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0833333333333 0.0759168565197 110% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0448717948718 0.0366838410393 122% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0288461538462 0.0131127313244 220% => OK
Prepositions: 0.137820512821 0.155750635184 88% => OK
Participles: 0.0608974358974 0.0379272487307 161% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.03645454201 2.65546596893 114% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0288461538462 0.0210936926555 137% => OK
Particles: 0.00320512820513 0.00175180941692 183% => OK
Determiners: 0.0705128205128 0.0948980150116 74% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0288461538462 0.00437022459523 660% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00641025641026 0.00967000014798 66% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1830.0 1161.00487805 158% => OK
No of words: 276.0 196.9 140% => OK
Chars per words: 6.63043478261 5.90752243213 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 3.73763899035 109% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.449275362319 0.337110787985 133% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.347826086957 0.247514529752 141% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.271739130435 0.171178102325 159% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.199275362319 0.112407865282 177% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03645454201 2.65546596893 114% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 106.607317073 156% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.601449275362 0.546246751206 110% => OK
Word variations: 64.9020087872 49.3433353143 132% => OK
How many sentences: 13.0 8.93414634146 146% => OK
Sentence length: 21.2307692308 23.0094962315 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.7643605637 42.9750493124 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.769230769 135.714022679 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2307692308 23.0094962315 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.923076923077 0.689975730869 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.84146341463 130% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.48048780488 0% => OK
Readability: 56.0133779264 47.7609492067 117% => OK
Elegance: 2.11428571429 2.94281807926 72% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.415516015793 0.418131533498 99% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0850583020218 0.181151798455 47% => Sentence sentence coherence is low.
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.071473149091 0.0850326197045 84% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.604382860097 0.706616315825 86% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.145065947427 0.157042692854 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.168516890846 0.228904883108 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0958521572024 0.108899403657 88% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.217109723488 0.367819155151 59% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0781384348317 0.0812612215331 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.265961105099 0.316326947829 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0912426526767 0.0921553760075 99% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 3.70731707317 270% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.14146341463 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.08536585366 49% => OK
Positive topic words: 10.0 3.16585365854 316% => OK
Negative topic words: 1.0 0.956097560976 105% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 3.02926829268 66% => OK
Total topic words: 13.0 7.1512195122 182% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. The e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.