The table and graph below give information about cinema attendance in Australia between 1994 and 2002
The table illustrates the percentage of Australians going to the cinema and their frequency from 1994 to 2002, and the line graph presents how many visits were made according to age group.
It is clear that the percentage of cinema attendants increased, while the average number of visits decreased over the period shown. Additionally, all age groups witnessed fluctuations in their figures, and 14-to 24-year-olds were the most frequent cinema visitors.
In 1994, about 67% of the total population went to cinema with about 10.7 times a year. This attendance increased to 72% two years later and then remained stable until 2002, despite a fall of 2% from 1998 to 2000. Meanwhile, the average frequency peak at 11.3 times annually in 1996, but then it stabilized at around 8.3 times.
Initially, the youngest group went to the cinema 12 times yearly, followed by 10 times of those aged 25 to 34. In contrast, the figure for the oldest group was lowest, at only 8 times per year. In 1996, the figures for all groups rose by about 1 time before decreasing by nearly 5 times in 1998. After that, the quantity of visits of each group grew slightly but the most regular visits still belonged to the youngest group, with about 10 times
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-11-09 | ngango56 | 67 | view |
| 2021-07-01 | Tienanh99 | 78 | view |
| 2020-02-25 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 61 | view |
| 2020-02-25 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 73 | view |
| 2020-02-25 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 78 | view |
- Studies suggest that many teenagers these days prefer socialising online to meeting one another in person Why do you think this is the case What measures could be taken to encourage teenagers to spend more time meeting one another in person Give reasons f 84
- Many students find it difficult to concentrate or pay attention at school What are the reasons What could be done to solve this problem 67
- Studies suggest that many teenagers these days prefer socialising online to meeting one another in person 11
- It is often thought that the increase in juvenile crime can be attributed to violence in the media do you agree that it is the main reason for a growth in the rate of juvenile crime What solutions can be offer to deal with this situation 84
- average monthly spend on children s sports in Britain 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, still, then, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 33.7804878049 130% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1026.0 965.302439024 106% => OK
No of words: 213.0 196.424390244 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.81690140845 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82027741392 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51268026695 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 106.607317073 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.605633802817 0.547539520022 111% => OK
syllable_count: 296.1 283.868780488 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 3.36585365854 238% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.5162667016 43.030603864 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.6 112.824112599 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3 22.9334400587 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.6 5.23603664747 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.159950670278 0.215688989381 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0681840891289 0.103423049105 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0648324847196 0.0843802449381 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113063436051 0.15604864568 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0544947630706 0.0819641961636 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.2329268293 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.68 11.4140731707 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.06136585366 100% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 40.7170731707 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.