Advantage and disadvantage of playing virtual games on teenagers.
Virtual games have been highlighted an emerging issue, escaping broader public controversy due to the ramifications on young generations, especially teenagers. Despite the downsides could be pronounced, the upsides could justify these.
On the one hand, virtual games could be fraught with many pitfalls. First, Action-related virtual games are invariably associated with teenagers’ constant exposure and psychological obsessions with violent and age-restricted materials. This could be the catalyst for youngsters’ mental impairments and negative behavioural changes stemming from their cognitive immaturity, breeding their possibilities of committing juvenile delinquency. Second, since teenagers’ increased concentrations on virtual games could cause excessive addiction, the formation of sedentary inclination without any physical activities could ensue. Consequently, such exercise deficiency would fuel abnormal or excessive fat content accumulation in young generations, making obesity and other health hazards inevitable products.
On the other hand, it is true that virtual games could bestow positive benefits. First, by playing virtual games, users could interact and intermingle with other peer players of different nationalities thanks to the characteristic of wireless connection. This could suggest the causal relationship with teenagers’ expanded social cycle, thereby strengthening their social behaviours and social connections, decentivising social inhibition. In addition, if teenagers play with virtual games with their company, the development of leadership and team working skill are highly likely, which are favourable for many job specifications, feeding into better employment prospects. The reason being that virtual games require enormous increased physical concentration, context analysis , strategic planning and team co-ordination, which are proved to be the basic elements of better working skills.
In conclusion, virtual games could offer both advantages and disadvantages. However, when users play with feasible frequency, the negative implications could be significantly alleviated.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-24 | Trần Ánh Vy | 89 | view |
| 2024-08-20 | ng duc minh | 56 | view |
| 2024-05-13 | awu212 | 89 | view |
| 2024-04-29 | Trần Ánh Vy | 89 | view |
| 2024-02-26 | Elvis Phuong | 84 | view |
- The chart below shows the number of travellers using three major airports in New York City between 1995 and 2000. 78
- Solving environmental problems should be the responsibility of an international organization rather than each national government. Do you agree or disagree? 93
- Now big cities have many problems. What are these problems? Do you think the government should encourage city residents to move to small cities and towns? 78
- The only way to improve road safety is to give much stricter punishments on driving offenses To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- the pie chart shows the percentages of expenditure on different items in USA 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 783, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...physical concentration, context analysis , strategic planning and team co-ordinati...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, however, if, second, so, then, in addition, in conclusion, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 24.0651302605 42% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 41.998997996 71% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1867.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 282.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.62056737589 5.12529762239 129% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.37215054798 2.80592935109 120% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 176.041082164 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.652482269504 0.561755894193 116% => OK
syllable_count: 559.8 506.74238477 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 2.0 1.60771543086 124% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.9881547239 49.4020404114 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.357142857 106.682146367 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1428571429 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.78571428571 7.06120827912 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.245890525355 0.244688304435 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0971975207061 0.084324248473 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0788929631732 0.0667982634062 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162698005868 0.151304729494 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0386554586017 0.056905535591 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.8 13.0946893788 151% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 17.34 50.2224549098 35% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.3001002004 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 21.12 12.4159519038 170% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.35 8.58950901804 132% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 78.4519038076 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.