The graph shows the amount spent by teenagers on the fast foods in Britain. The units are: Amount spent is pounds per week in the first figure ( income groups) Grams per week in the second figure.
The Delineated first bar graph reveals the information about the money spent on fast foods: Humburgers, fish and chips, pizza by the people under 18 years in Britain by their income groups, and second graph shows the Grams per week consumption of fast foods. The first graph is calibrated in pounds.
It can be seen that, people with high income had spent more money on hamburgers that is above 40 pounds while, the amount had been spent on pizza by average masses was approx 25 pounds. Moreover, teenagers with low income spent low money on pizza, fish and chips that is approximately 8%, 12%, respectively.
Moving Further, the second chart, in the starting years consumption of two type of foods was same but pizza had usage of 300 pounds in 1970. Further more, the other types of fast foods were eaten by people between 1980 and one of them inclined and other's consumption declined and after some time it increased till 1985.
Overall, it is evident that person with all types of income had spent more money on hamburgers, and very low amount on pizza.
- The diagram below show some principles of house design for cool and for warm climates. 84
- It is said that adulterated food is the key reason behind deteriorated health of all age groups masses How far you agree or disagree 54
- The given diagram shows the natural water purification system 36
- The maps below shows an island, before and after the construction of some tourist facilities. 90
- The chart shows British emigration to selected destinations between 2004 and 2005. summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparison where relevant. 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 51, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'years'' or 'year's'?
Suggestion: years'; year's
...ther, the second chart, in the starting years consumption of two type of foods was s...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 83, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tarting years consumption of two type of foods was same but pizza had usage of 30...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, moreover, second, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 5.60731707317 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 875.0 965.302439024 91% => OK
No of words: 185.0 196.424390244 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.72972972973 4.92477711251 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.68801715136 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.33776128605 2.65546596893 88% => OK
Unique words: 108.0 106.607317073 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.583783783784 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 252.0 283.868780488 89% => 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: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 3.36585365854 30% => 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: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.472197898 43.030603864 145% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.0 112.824112599 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.4285714286 22.9334400587 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.57142857143 5.23603664747 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.301875532122 0.215688989381 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.128123456906 0.103423049105 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0837942475219 0.0843802449381 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170314460963 0.15604864568 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0953839454103 0.0819641961636 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.2329268293 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 62.01 61.2550243902 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.45 11.4140731707 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.66 8.06136585366 95% => OK
difficult_words: 32.0 40.7170731707 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => 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.