The pie charts below show the average household expenditures in Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The given charts compare Japan and Malaysia in terms of the percentages of the average household expenses spent on five categories in 2010.
Overall, the Japanese and the Malaysian spent the largest proportion of their budget on housing, food, and other goods and services. Another striking feature is that while the expenditures spent on transport and healthcare by households in Malaysia comprised the smallest proportion, that in Japan accounted for a much larger one.
The percentage of spending on food was roughly equivalent in both countries, at 24% for Japan and 27% for Malaysia. In addition, the figure for money allocated for housing in Malaysia stood at more than a third, which was the highest of total expenditure, compared to that in Japan(21%).
Regarding healthcare, both Japanese and Malaysian families paid out the least for this category. Besides, the transport was expended exactly a fifth by Japanese families, which was twice as much as the figure for Malaysia. Meanwhile, other goods and services accounted for large proportions(at over a quarter) in both nations.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-12-18 | vuongthaolinh | 85 | view |
| 2023-06-19 | mykhanh | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-19 | Taytor2609 | 84 | view |
| 2022-07-19 | Taytor2609 | 100 | view |
| 2020-12-20 | vungochuyen25 | 78 | view |
- The graph below shows the number of tourists visiting a particular Caribbean island between 2010 and 2017 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- What are the causes effects solutions for global warming 84
- The first chart below shows the results of a survey that sampled a cross section of 100000 people asking if they traveled abroad and why they traveled for the period 1994 98 The second chart below shows their destinations over the same period Write a repo 73
- The maps below show the changes that have taken place at the waterfront area of a town called Darwin between 2009 and 2014 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- Some people believe that it is best to accept a bad situation such as an unsatisfactory job or shortage of money Others argue that it is better to try and improve such situations Discuss both these views and give your own opinion 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, if, regarding, third, while, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 33.7804878049 77% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 917.0 965.302439024 95% => OK
No of words: 173.0 196.424390244 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30057803468 4.92477711251 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.62669911048 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84555149074 2.65546596893 107% => OK
Unique words: 101.0 106.607317073 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.583815028902 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 279.0 283.868780488 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => 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: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.0107403851 43.030603864 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.625 112.824112599 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.625 22.9334400587 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.125 5.23603664747 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.09268292683 195% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.119516424521 0.215688989381 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0585093325188 0.103423049105 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0745046417154 0.0843802449381 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0958690772099 0.15604864568 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0759477642126 0.0819641961636 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.2329268293 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 61.2550243902 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 11.4140731707 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.52 8.06136585366 118% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 40.7170731707 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.