The use of technology is a visible and wide-spread phenomenon that increasingly shapes our daily lives. Concerning its effect on human interaction, while some believe that technology increases human interaction by sharing information, communicating fastly and easily, others state that it decreases human interaction in most cases. I agree with the latter who notify the harmful effect of technology use on human interaction due to its disrupting effect on time/space, banalization of topics to talk among people and lack of attention.
To begin with, individuals could interact with each other by sharing the same time and space. Technology changes this premise by offering the possibility to reach other people who live in great distances. Thus, individuals are not limited to talk only to those are around and to share whatever they have such as thoughts, experiences or expectations. For instance, someone from Istanbul can call his friend in New York City in a couple of seconds. Meanwhile, the same person may not have any conversation with his next-door neighbor. Landline or mobile phones connect us to those who live away rather than people living around.
Another detrimental point is that the content people face on technological devices makes irrelevant many conversational topics and their content such as jokes between friends. Presumably, your friends heard much more funny jokes than what you try to make him laugh. Hence, it is not as easy as imagined to find an interesting topic and content while talking to each other. Additionally, your interlocutor has a very limited level of attention to dedicate to your speech after using excessively tools of technology in his daily life.
It’s worth to mention that those who can not easily interact with people living around could find some other people to compensate for this need of sociality. Such as expatriates, handicappeds or minority members may find better interlocutors living in another city or country.
To conclude, the use of technology decreases human interaction in most cases because of the disruptive effect on time/space, the banalization of topics, and decreased personal attention.
- One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately 1/3 of its original force. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet availa 33
- The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice to a client. “Homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last year that region experi 50
- Some people believe that our ever-increasing use of technology significantly reduces our opportunities for human interaction. Other people believe that technology provides us with new and better ways to communicate and connect with 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 629, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... away rather than people living around. Another detrimental point is that the co...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 295, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'imagined finding'.
Suggestion: imagined finding
... him laugh. Hence, it is not as easy as imagined to find an interesting topic and content while ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 534, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... tools of technology in his daily life. It's worth to mention that those wh...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 283, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tors living in another city or country. To conclude, the use of technology decre...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, if, may, second, so, thus, while, for instance, such as, in most cases, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 19.5258426966 26% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 33.0505617978 82% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 58.6224719101 94% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1842.0 2235.4752809 82% => OK
No of words: 342.0 442.535393258 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38596491228 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30037696126 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98338478834 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.573099415205 0.4932671777 116% => OK
syllable_count: 591.3 704.065955056 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.1104791971 60.3974514979 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.125 118.986275619 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.375 23.4991977007 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.75 5.21951772744 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.313634377184 0.243740707755 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0892821271529 0.0831039109588 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.065487586993 0.0758088955206 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155770420606 0.150359130593 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0832957425018 0.0667264976115 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.8420337079 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.1639044944 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.8971910112 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.