The violence portrayed on TV and in the movies
leads to an increase in crime in our society.
People who watch violent movies are more likely
to become criminals. Do you agree or disagree? with it?
Recently, the phenomenon of violent TV program and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of tough regulation is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that study of preventing juveniles to watch violent movies can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, the violent program in television can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of violent activities among the young generation, as well as antisocial behavior are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the influence of unpleasant TV programs on youth. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both behavioral corruption and civil vandalism apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, prevailing crime by TV programs might increase the consequences of physical violence. Moreover, fundamental aspects of strict rules would relate to this reality that the demerits of abnormal behavior pertain to addition to drugs. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of the absence of law correlated negatively with moral corruption. It is correct to presume the preconceived notion of illegal acts.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of law and regulations in media far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of safety rules prove the significance of human behavior, but also pinpoint legal implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 468, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
.... Thus, beneficial ramifications of both behavioral corruption and civil vandalis...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.5418719212 85% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 31.9359605911 128% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.75862068966 208% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1520.0 1207.87684729 126% => OK
No of words: 274.0 242.827586207 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54744525547 5.00649968141 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17063185946 2.71678728327 117% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 139.433497537 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.660583941606 0.580463131201 114% => OK
syllable_count: 481.5 379.143842365 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.273823905 50.4703680194 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.666666667 104.977214359 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8333333333 20.9669160288 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.83333333333 7.25397266985 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 6.9802955665 57% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 2.75862068966 254% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 2.91625615764 34% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.112917789311 0.242375264174 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0351029261795 0.0925447433944 38% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0353007030127 0.071462118173 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0585673854728 0.151781067708 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0235428154524 0.0609392437508 39% => 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: 16.1 12.6369458128 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.1260098522 61% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.21 11.5310837438 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.89 8.32886699507 131% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 55.0591133005 194% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.