The graphs below show the cinema attendance in Australia and the average cinema visits by different age groups from 1996 to 2000. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
The table reveals information on the number and frequency of citizens visiting cinema in Australia between 1996 and 2000 while the line graph illustrates the average attendance to cinema by specific age groups in the similar period. Overall, meanwhile the population percentage attending to watch movies at the cinema increased, the rate of visiting witnessed a contradictory trend. Moreover, that of each age group depicted in the line graph rose slightly after a wild fluctuation.
When looking at the table, from 1996 to 1997, the percentage of people visiting cinema grew dramatically by 10% and reached a plateau at 72% in the next two years. However, between 1998 and 1999, the statistic depicted a minimal decrease to exactly 70%, which was followed by a recovery to its stage in 1997 and 1998. In the first two years of the time given, the frequency of attendance to cinema recorded a similar trend of nearly 1 time increase. Subsequently, between 1997 and 1999, the times people visiting cinema dropped remarkably to just slightly over 8, which then increased by 0,1 in 2000.
Moving on to describe the line graph, four groups of visitors ranging from 14 to over 50 fluctuated wildly between 10 and 25, however, still rose minimally when compared with its original stage at 10. From 1996 to 1998, the data showed a remarkable rise followed by a considerable drop to its original statistic in 1998. However, the average time of visitors reached a peak at 25 times a year in 199 and ended up falling slightly.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-02-21 | nvtrung309 | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-29 | nhattram39 | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-29 | nhattram39 | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-29 | nhattram39 | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-29 | nhattram39 | 78 | view |
- The plans show the change of a small theater in 2010 and 2012 11
- In some countries more young adults continue to live with their parents even after they have completed education and found jobs Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 84
- This pictures below show how tomato ketchup is made Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features 11
- The chart shows how frequently people in the USA ate in fast food restaurants between 2003 and 2013 56
- The diagram below shows how electricity is generated in a hydroelectric power station Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, look, moreover, still, then, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 7.0 14% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 33.7804878049 157% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1264.0 965.302439024 131% => OK
No of words: 257.0 196.424390244 131% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91828793774 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00390054096 3.73543355544 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72198387262 2.65546596893 103% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 106.607317073 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536964980545 0.547539520022 98% => OK
syllable_count: 384.3 283.868780488 135% => 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: 8.0 4.33902439024 184% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.4926829268 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.7356425014 43.030603864 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.4 112.824112599 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7 22.9334400587 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.4 5.23603664747 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249203996205 0.215688989381 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102317781235 0.103423049105 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0935973567675 0.0843802449381 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181120995482 0.15604864568 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105770408209 0.0819641961636 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.2329268293 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 61.2550243902 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 10.3012195122 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 11.4140731707 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.06136585366 107% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 40.7170731707 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.9970731707 109% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.