The charts below show the changes in ownership of electrical appliances and amount of time doing housework and households in one country between 1920 and 2019.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The given line charts indicate the change in the proportion of households that own washing machine, refrigerator, or vacuum cleaner, and how much time they spent on washing clothes, preparing meals, and cleaning from 1920 to 2019.
From an overall perspective, it was evident that the higher the number of households owning those electrical appliances, the less time they spent on the corresponding housework.
In 1920, households spent 50 hours per week on housework with 40% of which had a washing machine, 30% of which had a vacuum cleaner, and almost no one had a refrigerator.
In the next 20 years, the figure for weekly housework experienced a remarkable downward trend dropping to 20 hours when the proportion of refrigerator household owners soared to 90% and the data for washing machine and vacuum cleaner rose to the same number which was 70%.
From 1960 to 2019, the number of hours spent on housework continued to fall toward 10 hours as all the surveyed households had washing machine in 1980 and then had vacuum cleaner in 2000. However, the figure for households who had washing machine had witnessed a slight decline in 1980, at nearly 60% before reaching more than 70% in 2019.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-21 | nobitaa | 89 | view |
| 2024-08-21 | nobitaa | 89 | view |
| 2023-11-29 | Daniel3003 | 73 | view |
| 2023-05-01 | huyen_duong | 67 | view |
| 2023-05-01 | huyen_duong | 73 | view |
- The graph shows the amount of money spent on books in Germany France Italy and Australia between 1995 and 2005 78
- Fewer and fewer people walk on a daily basis What are the reasons and how to encourage them to spend their time walking 89
- Fewer and fewer people walk on a daily basis What are the reasons and how to encourage them to spend their time walking 78
- The older people who need employment have to compete with younger ones What problems can this create What are some solutions 84
- New technologies have changed the way children spend their free time Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 89
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, so, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 7.0 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => 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: 999.0 965.302439024 103% => OK
No of words: 202.0 196.424390244 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94554455446 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.76996954942 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71520550732 2.65546596893 102% => OK
Unique words: 113.0 106.607317073 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.559405940594 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 279.9 283.868780488 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 0.482926829268 828% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 8.94146341463 67% => 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: 33.0 22.4926829268 147% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 40.9366041039 43.030603864 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 166.5 112.824112599 148% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.6666666667 22.9334400587 147% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.83333333333 5.23603664747 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.83414634146 130% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.09268292683 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.124925765961 0.215688989381 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0729152905331 0.103423049105 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0323310045002 0.0843802449381 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0797730967962 0.15604864568 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0316561916175 0.0819641961636 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.7 13.2329268293 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.9 61.2550243902 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.3012195122 134% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 11.4140731707 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.06136585366 101% => OK
difficult_words: 37.0 40.7170731707 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.2 10.9970731707 138% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.