The chart below shows the results of three surveys on absenteeism in a particular European country in the years 2000, 2005 and 2010. The results show the reasons people gave for not going to work.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The chart illustrates the primary reasons attributed to employees’ absenteeism rates in a European country over a period, from 2000 to 2010.
It is immediately apparent that there were decreases in the number of people who subscribed to sickness and family duties, while the reverse was true for stress, personal needs, and unexpected situations. Additionally, illness was the most prevalent explanation during the given period.
In 2000, nearly 45% of the respondents ascribed their lack of attendance at work to illness, which experienced a 5% drop each year to hit a trough of 35% by 2010. Despite this, it still remained the dominant reason. Those who were absent due to family obligations had an identical pattern when it declined modestly from 27% to just 25% by 2005 and maintained a period of stability until 2010.
By contrast, a considerable increase can be witnessed in the proportion of people who blamed their work leave on personal needs (consisting of appointments), rising from 14% in the initial year to well over 23% in 2010. Meanwhile, unexpected situations recorded a lower growth of 3%, reaching 12% in the final year. In comparison, in spite of being the least popular cause, illness registered the most striking growth of 6% to a high of 12% in 2010, doubling the initial figure.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-05 | Huyenlbg87 | 78 | view |
| 2023-10-24 | tieuquynh | 84 | view |
- Topic Some people think it is more important to spend money on roads and motorways than on public transport systems To what extend do you agree 89
- It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environments such as the South pole Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages 84
- The diagram below show the development of the horse over a period of 40 million years The evolution of the horse with particular emphasis on the changing foot structure 78
- The graph below shows the number of university graduates in Canada from 1992 to 2007 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- Governments should make people responsible for looking after their own local environment To what extent do you agree or disagree 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 229, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ear to well over 23% in 2010. Meanwhile, unexpected situations recorded a lower g...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, so, still, well, while, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 33.7804878049 124% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1092.0 965.302439024 113% => OK
No of words: 216.0 196.424390244 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05555555556 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.83365862548 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91223943829 2.65546596893 110% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 106.607317073 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.652777777778 0.547539520022 119% => OK
syllable_count: 315.9 283.868780488 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => 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: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.0620414884 43.030603864 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.333333333 112.824112599 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 22.9334400587 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.44444444444 5.23603664747 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.157923575146 0.215688989381 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0594597128596 0.103423049105 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0552811466475 0.0843802449381 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100429533299 0.15604864568 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.061161973564 0.0819641961636 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.2329268293 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 61.2550243902 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 11.4140731707 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.06136585366 115% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 40.7170731707 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.