Line chart
The line chart compares the average yearly amount of money spending on mobile phone and landline phone services from 2001 to 2010.
It is clear that the spending on landline phone steadily decreased over 10-year period while the mobile phone expenditure rose quickly. And in 2006, the expenditure on mobile phone overtook for residential phone service.
In 2001, US consumers spent an average of nearly $700 on landline phone, compared to only around just over $200 on mobile phone. Over the following five years, the average spending on landline phone dropped by nearly $200. In contrast, expenditure on cell phone dramatically increased by around $300, from over $200 to $500.
In the year 2006, American paid out the same average amount of money on both types of phone services, spending over $500 per each. By 2010, the expenditure on mobile phone reached around $750, while the figure for home phone has fallen to yearly spending on just over a half this amount.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-09-05 | nobitaa | 73 | view |
| 2024-08-26 | khanhkhanhlhp | 84 | view |
| 2024-08-26 | khanhkhanhlhp | 84 | view |
| 2024-07-24 | nobitaa | 73 | view |
| 2024-07-08 | Vicky_2702 | 67 | view |
- More and more city workers are deciding to live in the country and travel into work every day The result is increased traffic congestion and damage to the environment What measures do you think could be taken to encourage people not to travel such long di 67
- Many people believe that schools should teach children to become good citizens and workers rather than independent individuals. To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give your own opinion and relevant examples. 78
- High technology is now being harnessed to help the elderly by providing monitoring tracking and perhaps one day robots as companions While there are obvious benefits for the elderly in these developments some people are uneasy about the consequences Discu 72
- Leaders and directors in an organization are normally older people. Some people think younger leader would be better. Do you agree or disagree? 78
- Line chart 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
while, in contrast
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 : 2.0 6.8 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 795.0 965.302439024 82% => OK
No of words: 162.0 196.424390244 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90740740741 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.56762134501 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42382027802 2.65546596893 91% => OK
Unique words: 84.0 106.607317073 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.518518518519 0.547539520022 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 251.1 283.868780488 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => 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: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 23.1243243145 43.030603864 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 99.375 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.25 22.9334400587 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.25 5.23603664747 43% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
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: 0.0465618988018 0.215688989381 22% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.030494465625 0.103423049105 29% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0806807724076 0.0843802449381 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.06098893125 0.15604864568 39% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105635927624 0.0819641961636 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.2329268293 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 61.2550243902 84% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.2 11.4140731707 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.26 8.06136585366 90% => OK
difficult_words: 27.0 40.7170731707 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.