The bar chart shows the types of media that people of different age groups used to get daily news in one country in 2011.
The bar chart illustrates the usage rate of media that citizens had access to get news on a daily basis in 2011.
In general, young people tended to use social networks to absorb daily news, whereas radio was used mainly to update on news from older people groups. It is clear that micro-blogging attracted a small proportion of users in age catalogs
Regarding 10-29 ages, a significant percentage of users accessed social media platforms to update daily news, at 80% while the proportion of radio was over 90% from young adults (18-29), which was double higher than adolescents (10-17). Around a quarter of the populace was recorded using micro-blogging to update news in both the 10-17 group and the 19-29 group, at 20% and 25%, respectively.
Moving on to the remaining age groups, radio users accounted for a big amount(about 90%) in the age bracket got higher. Also, an insignificant rate of using micro-blogging to update news was below 15% in those. There are considerable differences in the usage rate of social media with 30-49 age catalogs, 50-64 age catalogs, and exceeding 65 age catalogs, at 45%, 35%, and 10%, respectively.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-10 | nobitaa | 67 | view |
| 2023-09-12 | nguyentuancn13@gmail.com | 73 | view |
| 2023-07-16 | 17142052@student.hcmute.edu.vn | 84 | view |
| 2023-03-08 | giangngoc | 78 | view |
| 2022-11-24 | giangngoc | 78 | view |
- The chart below shows how frequently people in the USA ate fast food in shops between 2003 and 2013 78
- The bar chart shows the types of media that people of different age groups used to get daily news in one country in 2011 84
- The chart shows the percentage of males and females who were overweight in Australia from 1980 to 2010 60
- The chart shows the percentage of males and females who were overweight in Australia from 1980 to 2010 100
- The charts below show the average percentages in typical meals of three types of nutrients all of which may be unhealthy if eaten too much Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant Average p 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, regarding, so, whereas, while, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 33.7804878049 104% => 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: 945.0 965.302439024 98% => OK
No of words: 191.0 196.424390244 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94764397906 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.71756304063 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82718634839 2.65546596893 106% => OK
Unique words: 112.0 106.607317073 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586387434555 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 284.4 283.868780488 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 22.4926829268 120% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 70.5566786205 43.030603864 164% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.0 112.824112599 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.2857142857 22.9334400587 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.28571428571 5.23603664747 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.285817335184 0.215688989381 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.138898282036 0.103423049105 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0824988796965 0.0843802449381 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.193449009801 0.15604864568 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.074335824875 0.0819641961636 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.2329268293 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 61.2550243902 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 10.3012195122 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 11.4140731707 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.06136585366 109% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 40.7170731707 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 11.4329268293 157% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.9970731707 116% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.