Digital communication technology, such has email, instant messaging and social media, has improved communication and connections between people. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Advancements in technology have made it easier for people to communicate and interact with each other. However, I think, better communication does not always mean meaningful connections. In this essay, I will argue that while digital communication may be easy, it is not a substitute for face-to-face interactive communication and forming meaningful connections.
As compared to the past, it is now easier, convenient and cheaper to communicate with people around the world. Technologies such as instant messaging, email and other social media services have changed our way of communicating with each other. A few decades ago, communicating with someone was a time-consuming, costly and an inefficient affair. Today, it is possible to contact a person residing anywhere in the world with just a single click. A recent technology, video-calling, where we can see the other person on a screen has improved the way we can talk with our loved ones.
Although, technology has made it easier for people to communicate, it has not improved connections and relationships of people in an emotional manner. Digital communication will never be able to replicate face-to-face interaction between people, as it is not on an emotional level. Humans rely on physical touch, facial expressions and body language to understand and form a bond with each other. Connections are only possible through true face-to-face communication.
Digital technology has undoubtedly improved communication, but not connections. Connections improve when people can express their feelings which cannot be expressed through messages. Although, the way we communicate has changed, our primal ways of connecting haven’t. We need physical face-to-face interactions to form meaningful, long-lasting connections with others, for which, our current technology is not a substitute.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-29 | Pranav Pawar | 61 | view |
- Digital communication technology, such has email, instant messaging and social media, has improved communication and connections between people. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? 61
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of unemployed graduates, aged 20-24, in one European country over a two-year period. 78
- With the increased global demand in oil and gas, undiscovered areas of the world should be opened up to access more resources.To what extent do you agree? 56
- We live in a world of technology these days. While the internet brings with it clear advantages, the problems in terms of control and security of information outweighs the advantages.To what extent do you agree? 56
- People sleep less than before in many countries. Why do people sleep less? What effect does it have on an individual and on society? 100
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 128, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an emotional manner" with adverb for "emotional"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...connections and relationships of people in an emotional manner. Digital communication will never be ab...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, may, so, while, i think, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1585.0 1615.20841683 98% => OK
No of words: 277.0 315.596192385 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.72202166065 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.45017580249 2.80592935109 123% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 176.041082164 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.559566787004 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 492.3 506.74238477 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.7173047787 49.4020404114 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 99.0625 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3125 20.7667163134 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.875 7.06120827912 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.254035114576 0.244688304435 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0857969518133 0.084324248473 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.050539497308 0.0667982634062 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156949230407 0.151304729494 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.036508900981 0.056905535591 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 50.2224549098 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.6 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.93 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 78.4519038076 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.