The table and graph below give information about cinema attendance in Australia between 1994 and 2002.
The table and line chart compare four different age groups in terms of the percentage of Australians going to the cinema and their frequency from 1994 to 2002, and how many visits were made according to age group.
Generally, the proportion of cinema attendants increased, while the average number of access decreased over the phase shown. Additionally, all age groups witnessed fluctuations in their figures, and 14 to 24 years old were the most frequent client of the cinema.
As can be seen from the table, 67% of the Australian population went to watch movies in 1994, this figure then rose markedly to 72% in 1996 and remained unchanged until 2002, despite a dip of 2% in 2000. Meanwhile, the frequency of Australian attended the cinema 10.7 times per year in 1994 and this data reached a peak of 11.3 times in 1996 before falling remarkably to 8.3 times in the last year of the period.
Regarding the line chart, initially, the youngest group performed trip to the cinema 12 times yearly, followed by 10 times and 8 times of those aged 25 to 34 and 35 to 49 respectively. In contrast, the parameter for the oldest group was only about 8.5 times annual. Surprisingly, these four age groups climbed slightly to peaks in 1996 before dropping to the lowest points in 1998. After that, the above data started to recover till 2002 when people between 14 and 24 years old made about 10 visits on average, compared to 6% by those aged 35-49 and 8 times visit for both other groups.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-11-09 | ngango56 | 67 | view |
| 2021-07-01 | Tienanh99 | 78 | view |
| 2020-02-25 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 61 | view |
| 2020-02-25 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 73 | view |
| 2020-02-25 | Nguyen Manh Dung | 78 | view |
- The line graph shows three different crimes in England and Wales in 1970-2005. 73
- Nowadays some employers think that formal qualifications are more important than life experience or personal qualities when they look for new employees Why is this the case Is it a positive or negative development 78
- The diagram below shows the recycling process of plastics 78
- More and more people want to buy clothes cars and other products from well known brands What are the reasons Do you think it is a positive or negative development 89
- In many cities there is little control on the design and construction of new houses so people can build houses in their own style rather than building them with the same style or the old houses in the local area Do advantages outweigh dissdvantages 89
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, regarding, then, while, in contrast
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: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 33.7804878049 157% => 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: 1221.0 965.302439024 126% => OK
No of words: 262.0 196.424390244 133% => OK
Chars per words: 4.66030534351 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 3.73543355544 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51601999646 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 106.607317073 145% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.591603053435 0.547539520022 108% => OK
syllable_count: 354.6 283.868780488 125% => 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
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 22.4926829268 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 46.7105613669 43.030603864 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.666666667 112.824112599 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.1111111111 22.9334400587 127% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.33333333333 5.23603664747 83% => OK
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 : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => 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: 0.149894974099 0.215688989381 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0612346738821 0.103423049105 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0348568576371 0.0843802449381 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0947321924366 0.15604864568 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0181070076941 0.0819641961636 22% => 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: 15.1 13.2329268293 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.96 61.2550243902 96% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.2 10.3012195122 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.34 11.4140731707 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.06136585366 104% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 40.7170731707 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.9970731707 124% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => 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.