In the modern world it is possible to shop, work and communicate with people via the internet and live without any face-to-face contact with others. Is this a positive or negative development?
It is true that in contemporary life people in many parts of the world are able to do their shopping, work and communicate with each other via the internet. While there are clear positive aspects of this trend, there are also negative aspects of having less face-to-face contact with other people.
On the one hand, the internet can be very handy in many ways. Many people use it to keep in touch with friends and family, using Facebook, Skype or What’s App to send instant messages or to enjoy a quick chat. Many also use the internet for online shopping, thus saving time and petrol on trips to the supermarket as well as hunting around different sites for bargains. However, it is in terms of work that the internet offers the most potential benefits. More and more people are working or even studying from home, at hours which suit their own schedules. Many hours are saved each week by eliminating the daily commute and the stress of coping with the rush hour.
On the other hand, as social beings, people need personal contacts. Firstly, virtual friendships which are formed online may not be genuine. The media carries many horror stories of youngsters who have fallen prey to paedophiles, for example. Secondly, online shopping is not always appropriate, depending on the item. It is best, for instance, to try on clothes before buying, and while a bookworm can find almost any book title that they want online, they will certainly miss browsing the shelves of bookstores. Finally, personal interaction with work colleagues can generate ideas and avoid misunderstandings.
In conclusion, although there are positive aspects of this trend, there are also aspects of face-to-face contact which it would be a shame to lose.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-22 | Nivedha_palani | 78 | view |
| 2019-11-15 | Habui | 22 | view |
| 2019-07-05 | hplong93 | 78 | view |
| 2019-06-10 | Maudgil | 78 | view |
| 2019-04-19 | kiddomiddo | 73 | view |
- For school children, their teachers have more influence on their intelligence and social development than their parents. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 56
- People s lives are now surrounded by advertisement This affects what people consider important and has a negative impact on people s lives To what extent do you agree or disagree 78
- In the modern world it is possible to shop, work and communicate with people via the internet and live without any face-to-face contact with others. Is this a positive or negative development? 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, as well as, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.3376753507 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1455.0 1615.20841683 90% => OK
No of words: 292.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.98287671233 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62201541093 2.80592935109 93% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.592465753425 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 448.2 506.74238477 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.3019083506 49.4020404114 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.0 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4666666667 20.7667163134 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.5333333333 7.06120827912 163% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.281356007331 0.244688304435 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0794958890095 0.084324248473 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0817482104357 0.0667982634062 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185333820146 0.151304729494 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.1178060925 0.056905535591 207% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.0946893788 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 50.2224549098 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.3001002004 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.4159519038 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 78.4519038076 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.