The provided bar chart compares statistics on gross time spent by British people on three different types of phone calls over the 7-year period from 1995.
As is evident from the given information, the usage of local fixed lines was the highest among the three categories. While the indications for national and international as well as mobiles witnessed a constant growth throughout the period shown, the figure for local calls remained the same after 7 years.
In 1995, people in the UK used the local calls for around 72 billion minutes. Over the next 4 years, the figure increased considerably and reached a peak of 90 billion minutes. However, the opposite trend happened to the illustrations of local calls in the second half of the research duration and returned to their initial status in 2002 with approximately 72 billion minutes called.
In terms of the other two types of phone calls, the national and international calls were used for about 37 billion minutes, nine times higher than the usage time for mobile calls at just 4 billion minutes. Whereas the number of minutes of mobile calls experienced a significant rise and peaked at nearly 46 billion minutes over the following 7 years, the figure for national and international calls using landline rose to 60 billion minutes. In 2002, the gap between the two types was seen as the smallest in the amount of spending.
- The graph below shows changes in young adult unemployment rates in England between 1993 and 2012 73
- The chart below shows the total numbers of minutes in billions of telephone calls in the UK divided into three categories from 1995 to 2002 56
- The graph below shows the proportion of the population aged 65 and over between 1940 and 2040 in three different countries Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main feature and make comparisons where relevant 84
- The graph below gives information about car ownership in Britain from 1971 to 2007 78
- The chart below shows the total numbers of minutes in billions of telephone calls in the UK divided into three categories from 1995 to 2002 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, second, well, whereas, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 0.0 3.15609756098 0% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 5.60731707317 18% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 33.7804878049 112% => 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: 1152.0 965.302439024 119% => OK
No of words: 234.0 196.424390244 119% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92307692308 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91114542567 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63242313184 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 106.607317073 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542735042735 0.547539520022 99% => OK
syllable_count: 351.9 283.868780488 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.33902439024 184% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.5877684387 43.030603864 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.0 112.824112599 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0 22.9334400587 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.88888888889 5.23603664747 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
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: 0.228781546944 0.215688989381 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0985452480368 0.103423049105 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0561332630227 0.0843802449381 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138163794963 0.15604864568 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0433469821315 0.0819641961636 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.2329268293 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 61.2550243902 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.3012195122 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 11.4140731707 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.06136585366 105% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 40.7170731707 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.