The pie charts below describe average household expenditures by major categories in Japan and Malaysia in 2010.
Write a report for a university lecturer describing the information shown.
The pie charts depict the proportions of money spent on households in Japan compared to Malaysia in 2010 based on five categories namely- housing, transportation, food, healthcare and other goods and services.
As illustrated, most of the expenditures in Japan was made on goods and other services, comprising 29% of the total expenditures compared to Malaysia, which only spends 26%. Food came as second priority for both countries with 24% and 27% of total household costs respectively. Housing in Japan is placed as the third priority with an average of 21% expenditure in comparison to Malaysia, which places their housing as their major expenditure. Furthermore, money spent for transportation fall as the fourth priority with an average of 20% in Japan and 10% in Malaysia. Lastly, healthcare was observed to be the least priority for both countries comprising 6% and 3% of the total expenditures.
Overall, the data indicates that the main expenses in both countries were on goods and services, food and housing, while transportation and healthcare were given least prioritised.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-06-12 | thupham1909 | 67 | view |
- The pie charts below describe average household expenditures by major categories in Japan and Malaysia in 2010. Write a report for a university lecturer describing the information shown. 73
- Some people believe that studying at university or college is the best route to a successful career, while others believe that it is better to get a job straight after school. Discuss both views 61
- The line graph below shows the percantage of tourists to England who visited four different attractions in Brighton.Summarise the information by selactig and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 67
- The chart below gives information about the most common sports played in New Zealand in 2002.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 61
- the graph shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004. 79
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, lastly, second, so, third, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 33.7804878049 77% => 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: 920.0 965.302439024 95% => OK
No of words: 172.0 196.424390244 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3488372093 4.92477711251 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.62144681703 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14963920947 2.65546596893 119% => OK
Unique words: 93.0 106.607317073 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540697674419 0.547539520022 99% => OK
syllable_count: 272.7 283.868780488 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.114634146341 0% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 3.36585365854 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.142276418 43.030603864 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.428571429 112.824112599 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5714285714 22.9334400587 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.42857142857 5.23603664747 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192902398866 0.215688989381 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0906436622048 0.103423049105 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0598422723655 0.0843802449381 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119279066157 0.15604864568 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0849274793203 0.0819641961636 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.2329268293 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 61.2550243902 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.3012195122 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.05 11.4140731707 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.06136585366 108% => OK
difficult_words: 42.0 40.7170731707 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.4329268293 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.0658536585 136% => 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.