The graphs below show the cinema attendance in Australia and the average cinema visits by different age groups from 1996 to 2000. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
The given table shows changes in percentages of cinemagoers regardless of ages while the line chart compares the average of movie attendance based on 4 different age brackets in Australia between 1996 and 2000.
Overall, although there was an increasing number of Australians attending cinemas, the average annual visits decreased over the given time. Additionally, it is evident that the changes in cinema visits of all ages followed a parallel pattern, albeit at different rates.
Considering the table, there was 62 % of Australian population going to the cinema in 1996. This number reached its peak after a year, at 72%, where it plateaued afterwards, except for a slight decrease in 1999. Meanwhile, a minor increase in the annual frequency was recorded in 1997 which went up from 10.3 to 11.1, however, the figure dipped to 8.2 in 1999.
It can be seen from the second chart that the older people got, the less they visited the cinema despite years. In 1996, the average number of cinema visits lay between 10 and 15/ year, in which the younger age group visiting cinema slightly more than the older group. Those figures fluctuated fluctuated similarly from 10 to 25/ year throughout the given period.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-02-21 | nvtrung309 | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-29 | nhattram39 | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-29 | nhattram39 | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-29 | nhattram39 | 78 | view |
| 2022-07-29 | nhattram39 | 78 | view |
- The graphs below show the cinema attendance in Australia and the average cinema visits by different age groups from 1996 to 2000 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- The number of passengers using three rail networks from 1950 to 2010
- The number of passengers using three rail networks from 1950 to 2010
- Topic many people put their personal information online address telephone number and so on for purposes such as signing up for social networks or online banking Is this a positive or negative development 84
- News Media is more influential nowadays and some people think it is a negative development. to what extent do you agree or disagree? 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 284, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: fluctuated
...ore than the older group. Those figures fluctuated fluctuated similarly from 10 to 25/ year throughou...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, second, similarly, while, except for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 6.8 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 5.60731707317 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => 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: 1016.0 965.302439024 105% => OK
No of words: 201.0 196.424390244 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05472636816 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.76529505866 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5945695213 2.65546596893 98% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 106.607317073 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.641791044776 0.547539520022 117% => OK
syllable_count: 300.6 283.868780488 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.4802681093 43.030603864 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.888888889 112.824112599 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3333333333 22.9334400587 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.44444444444 5.23603664747 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.293333993063 0.215688989381 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.11154158473 0.103423049105 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0811571812629 0.0843802449381 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.17023174483 0.15604864568 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.059084530173 0.0819641961636 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.2329268293 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 61.2550243902 94% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.3012195122 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 11.4140731707 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.06136585366 111% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 40.7170731707 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => 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.