All results of publicly funded scientific studies should be made available to the general public free of charge. Scientific journals that charge a subscription or newsstand price are profiting unfairly.
Publicly funded scientific studies should indeed be made available to the general public free of charge. Following are three points in favor of the same.
Price on publicly funded research can motivate disregard for elimination of bias, if not bias itself. Let us consider the two extremes where studies are made public free of charge and another where they are available at a very high price. Providing such research at free of cost essentially implies that a more diverse readership has access to the studies. This would mean that the studies will go a very strict check once they are published, thereby there would be little scope of bias in the study. Empirical results are much permeable to biased conclusions, thus considering the vast readership the studies will get, the researchers will be compelled to bring bias to a minimum. Now consider the case when the journals are sold at a very high price, this by itself would mean that readership would narrow down to the people who already are in that field and might agree to some biases which are generally accepted in that field, irrespective of the basis of such assumption.
Transparency would be impeded, if prices are imposed. Publicly funded research which can affect public should be made public to the general mass free of charge. it is the right of every citizen to have information which affects her/him. Putting a price on studies will imply discrimination on the basis of economic standing.
To promote and inculcate scientific temperament the journals should be made free of charge. It will also lead to increased inter disciplinary collaborations and understanding. Thus, the price on the journals will reduce the number of cross disciplinary readership.
Thereby, considering the above points, publicly funded scientific studies should be made available to public free of charge.
- Computerized Voting System 85
- All results of publicly funded scientific studies should be made available to the general public free of charge. Scientific journals that charge a subscription or newsstand price are profiting unfairly. 50
- Statement of Purpose 16
- Men and women are not equal in terms of physical strength for many tasks. 70
- "The desire of corporations to maximize profits creates conflict with the general welfare of the nation at large. "Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples f 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 75, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... should indeed be made available to the general public free of charge. Following are three poi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 162, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...lic to the general mass free of charge. it is the right of every citizen to have i...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, so, thus, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 14.8657303371 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 33.0505617978 48% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 58.6224719101 72% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1568.0 2235.4752809 70% => OK
No of words: 303.0 442.535393258 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.17491749175 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17215713816 4.55969084622 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76005477922 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 215.323595506 72% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.508250825083 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 482.4 704.065955056 69% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 56.6645488268 60.3974514979 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.0 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9375 23.4991977007 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.125 5.21951772744 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.445553324724 0.243740707755 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.165424150408 0.0831039109588 199% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.192966914142 0.0758088955206 255% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.339600401704 0.150359130593 226% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.14272657807 0.0667264976115 214% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 100.480337079 64% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.