A good listener is better than a good talker in a social situation. Do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of "a good listener is better than a good talker in a social situation" and its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debating the proposition that the ability of being a good talker might be remarkably fruitful, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a remarkable number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that a good listener can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the society standpoint, being a good listener in a social situation can provide the society with profound effects, which might stem from the fact that the ability of actively listening and public relations are inextricably bound up. Regarding my personal experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the effects of listening on the adults' sympathy. Thus, invaluable ramifications of both promoting society's emotions and developing good family links distinctly can be observed.
Within the realm of psychology, without the slightest doubt, a good talker in a social situation might exacerbate the already catastrophic consequences of being a chatty person. Moreover, fundamental aspects of speech can relate to the reality that the demerits of talking in a bad manner can pertain to the low-level knowledge. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that if the downsides of speaking without reasons were correlated positively with listening strategies, the local authorities would ultimately address children's speech problems. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the preconceived notion of psychological effects of being a good talker.
To conclude, despite several compelling arguments on both sides, I opt to vigorously support the idea that the merits of being a good listener in a social situation far outweigh its downsides.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-31 | Rafia Jawad | 85 | view |
| 2024-08-14 | Rafia Jawad | 85 | view |
| 2024-05-24 | Sridarani | 69 | view |
| 2024-04-25 | Rafia Jawad | 55 | view |
| 2024-01-22 | topraveesh | 88 | view |
- The idea of having a single career is becoming an old fashioned one The new fashion will be to have several careers or ways of earning money and further education will be something that continues throughout life 89
- n the future nobody will buy printed newspapers or books because they will be able to read everything they want online without paying To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 89
- Large shopping malls are replacing small shops What is your opinion on this Do you think this is a good or bad change 89
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of Australian men and women in different age groups who did regular physical activity in 2010 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- Which one has the greater impact on human s life aeroplanes or cars 88
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 149, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...nd its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debati...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 389, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'adults'' or 'adult's'?
Suggestion: adults'; adult's
...covered the effects of listening on the adults sympathy. Thus, invaluable ramification...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 274, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a bad manner" with adverb for "bad"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...he reality that the demerits of talking in a bad manner can pertain to the low-level knowledge....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, if, moreover, regarding, so, thus, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.5418719212 142% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 6.10837438424 164% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 31.9359605911 125% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1655.0 1207.87684729 137% => OK
No of words: 299.0 242.827586207 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53511705686 5.00649968141 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20677714357 2.71678728327 118% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 139.433497537 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.588628762542 0.580463131201 101% => OK
syllable_count: 522.9 379.143842365 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 20.5024630542 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 51.6075463762 50.4703680194 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 150.454545455 104.977214359 143% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1818181818 20.9669160288 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.45454545455 7.25397266985 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.33497536946 56% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 6.9802955665 143% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 2.91625615764 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.331623058127 0.242375264174 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131296842783 0.0925447433944 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104748912362 0.071462118173 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.208489591471 0.151781067708 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0694645661389 0.0609392437508 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 12.6369458128 145% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 53.1260098522 67% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.15 11.5310837438 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.78 8.32886699507 129% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 55.0591133005 200% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.3980295567 123% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 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.