The two pie charts compare and contrast statistic figures of the Japanese and Malaysian average household costs divided into five categories in 2010, measured by percentage.
An overview of the diagrams illustrates the common in both countries was that they spent the least of their expenditures for health care problems.
More specifically, the average amount of money spent on food accounted for roughly a quarter which was at first and second place in Japan and Malaysia respectively. The expenditures of housing also experienced the same situation, which made up 34% in Malaysia, but only one-fifth in their counterpart country. Transport, however, seemed to be less important for the Malaysian household costs with 10% which was half of that of the Japanese. A further point to note is that the health care problem was the least category which was made up of the total amount of the others with only 6% and 3% in Japan and Malaysia respectively.
- The charts shows air pollution levels by different causes among four countries in 2012 82
- People in the community can buy cheaper products nowadays. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? 84
- Some universities now offer their courses on the Internet so that people can study online Is this a positive or negative development 67
- Some people think planning future is a waste of time and people should focus on the present To what extent do you agree or disagree 69
- The charts show the percentage of boys and girls aged 5 14 taking part in cultural activities and sports in Australia in 2003 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 33.7804878049 74% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 800.0 965.302439024 83% => OK
No of words: 157.0 196.424390244 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09554140127 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.53976893118 3.73543355544 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84267737134 2.65546596893 107% => OK
Unique words: 95.0 106.607317073 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.605095541401 0.547539520022 111% => OK
syllable_count: 243.9 283.868780488 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 0.0 3.36585365854 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 8.94146341463 67% => 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: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 18.9948823517 43.030603864 44% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 133.333333333 112.824112599 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1666666667 22.9334400587 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.83333333333 5.23603664747 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.201105012001 0.215688989381 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.092300193541 0.103423049105 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0598545231395 0.0843802449381 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127515605767 0.15604864568 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0713629181481 0.0819641961636 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 13.2329268293 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 61.2550243902 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.3012195122 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 11.4140731707 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.06136585366 110% => OK
difficult_words: 39.0 40.7170731707 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.4329268293 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => 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.