The graph below shows relative price changes for fresh fruits and vegetables, sugars and sweets, and carbonated drinks between 1978 and 2009.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The line graph provides information about changes in price in the USA of three different food product groups from 1979 to 2009, and the overall trend in the consumer price index over this 30-year period.
Overall, it is clear that prices increased for the three food product groups, despite fluctuations. Only the increase in the prices for fresh fruits and vegetables was significantly higher than the rise in the general consumer price index.
All the lines on the graph have the same starting figure in 1979. Over the period, the consumer price index rose steadily from around 60 in 1979 to over 200 in 2009. Prices for sugar and sweets and carbonated drinks showed similar trends. Although their prices also rose, they were consistently below the consumer price index average after 1987. After many minor fluctuations, the number for sugar and sweets was 200 on the graph in 2009, higher than the final figure for carbonated drinks at 150.
Prices rose sharply for fresh fruits and vegetables, particularly after 1989. From the same figure of about 60 at the start of the period, the prices finished at roughly 330 on the index in 2009.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-03-23 | NhatPhong | 67 | view |
| 2017-07-16 | Thao Anh194 | 84 | view |
| 2017-06-15 | baonguyen3011 | 73 | view |
- Whether or not someone achieves their aims is mostly by a question of luck. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 78
- The graph below shows relative price changes for fresh fruits and vegetables, sugars and sweets, and carbonated drinks between 1978 and 2009.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- The graph and table below give information about water use worldwide and water consumption in two different countries. 73
- The graph below gives information from a 2008 report about consumption of energy in the USAsince 1980 with projections until 2030 73
- The line graph below shows the percentage of tourists to England who visited four different attractions in Brighton Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 87
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, so
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 : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 33.7804878049 104% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 950.0 965.302439024 98% => OK
No of words: 194.0 196.424390244 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89690721649 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.73207559907 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.34906810204 2.65546596893 88% => OK
Unique words: 100.0 106.607317073 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.515463917526 0.547539520022 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 275.4 283.868780488 97% => 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
Interrogative: 0.0 0.114634146341 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.9469648409 43.030603864 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.0 112.824112599 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4 22.9334400587 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.2 5.23603664747 23% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.245951986023 0.215688989381 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114147706924 0.103423049105 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0676499882242 0.0843802449381 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153714159964 0.15604864568 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.035484819394 0.0819641961636 43% => 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: 11.3 13.2329268293 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 61.2550243902 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 11.4140731707 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.92 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.