The chart below shows the percentage of their food budget the average family spent on restaurant meals in different years. The graph shows the number of meals eaten in fast food restaurants and sit-down restaurants.
The four pie charts, along with the line graph, provide the overview of the average household budget spent on meals in restaurants, and comparing the number of them eaten in two different types of restaurant from 1970 to 2000.
It is noticeable that home cooking mostly accounted for a larger proportion of the food budget in comparison with restaurant meals. According to the line chart, meals in both fast food and sitdown restaurants increased for the thirtieth year in a row.
During the first decade of the period, restaurant meals represented only a small fraction of the average household budget (10 per cent in 1970 and 15 per cent in 1980). By contrast, the equivalent figures for the food cooked at home were between 90 per cent and 85 per cent. However, the expenditure on restaurant meals gradually increased by 35 per cent throughout the last two decades of the period, and finally sharing the same proportion with home cooking as of 2000.
With respect to the number of meals served in two categories of restaurant given, fast food meals saw a significantly larger rise than in sitdown restaurants. By far the most dramatic increase in fast food meals was from 30 meals per year in 1980 to over 80 meals by 2000. Meanwhile, sitdown restaurant meals grew by 30 meals per year over the 30-year period, totalling 50 meals at period-end.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-15 | kaka singh | 89 | view |
| 2019-12-30 | Annie442 | 58 | view |
| 2019-12-27 | rahulsd | 61 | view |
| 2019-11-25 | Chandrakumar Chanthujan | 67 | view |
| 2019-10-28 | Tosyne | 67 | view |
- The chart below gives information about Someland's main exports in 2005, 2015, and future projections for 2025. 78
- Some people say government should give the health care the first priorities, some others believe there are more important priorities to spend the tax payers' money. Discuss both views and give your opinion. 78
- Individuals can do nothing to improve the environment, only governments and large companies can make a difference.To what extent do you agree or disagree? 89
- Nowadays, not enough students choose science subjects in university in many countries. What are the reasons for this problem? What are the effects on the society? 41
- The pie charts below give data on the spending and consumption of resources by countries of the world and how the population is distributed 70
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, so, while, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 33.7804878049 133% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1125.0 965.302439024 117% => OK
No of words: 232.0 196.424390244 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84913793103 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90276135726 3.73543355544 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67865996966 2.65546596893 101% => OK
Unique words: 116.0 106.607317073 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.547539520022 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 315.0 283.868780488 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.4926829268 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.1571698494 43.030603864 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.0 112.824112599 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7777777778 22.9334400587 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.11111111111 5.23603664747 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.339614699596 0.215688989381 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.165530820337 0.103423049105 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0762581276996 0.0843802449381 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.226599102785 0.15604864568 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0652064996711 0.0819641961636 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.2329268293 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 63.02 61.2550243902 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.3012195122 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.15 11.4140731707 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.87 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 44.0 40.7170731707 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.9970731707 109% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.