Recently, the phenomenon of cashless society and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of people using more credit cards is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to beleive that such kind of facilities should be available and that can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, this cashless society where people using more credit cards, can provide society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that cashless transactions, as well as banks, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the benefits of cashless society. Thus, beneficial remifications of both banks and cashless facilities in most of the cities apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, these electronic transactions might increase the consequences money loss. Moreover, fundamental aspects of such electronic transactions could relate to this reality that the demerits of cashless society pertain to some monetory issues. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigeous universty has asserted that the downside of all electroning transactions is negatively correlated with the cashless society. Hence, it is correct to presume that the preconceived notion of such societies using credit or debit cards.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly beleive that the benefits of electronic transactions far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of cashless society prove the singnificance of ease, but also pinpoint that cashless implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 79, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'consequences'' or 'consequence's'?
Suggestion: consequences'; consequence's
...ctronic transactions might increase the consequences money loss. Moreover, fundamental aspec...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, kind of, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 6.10837438424 115% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 8.36945812808 84% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 5.94088669951 236% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 23.0 20.9802955665 110% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 31.9359605911 103% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.75862068966 69% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1559.0 1207.87684729 129% => OK
No of words: 277.0 242.827586207 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62815884477 5.00649968141 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15632493617 2.71678728327 116% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 139.433497537 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606498194946 0.580463131201 104% => OK
syllable_count: 486.0 379.143842365 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.6157635468 130% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.3159413093 50.4703680194 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.916666667 104.977214359 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0833333333 20.9669160288 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.16666666667 7.25397266985 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.29371350998 0.242375264174 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0916435191572 0.0925447433944 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0711458997792 0.071462118173 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.160466225354 0.151781067708 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.056399846066 0.0609392437508 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 12.6369458128 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 53.1260098522 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.67 11.5310837438 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.02 8.32886699507 120% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 55.0591133005 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
Note: 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.