The tables below show the information on teenagers who smoked in Europe in three years of 1980 to 1988 and 1998.
The tables illustrate the percentage of teenagers who smoke in Europe in three different years of 1980, 1988 and 1998.
Overall, it can be seen that the highest percentage of teenagers who were 13 years old smoked in 1988 whereas the lowest percentage was 15 years old in 1988.
In term of male, the percentage of teenagers who smoked was the highest for 13 years old while the lowest percentage was for 14 years old in 1982. The figures were 18% and 9% respectively. However, 12% accounted for 15 years old. There was a dramatic increase in the percentage of teenagers who were 13 from 18% to 28% between 1982 and 1998. The percentage of teenagers who were 14 soared to 19% in 1998 then it plummeted to 7% in 1998. The teenagers who were 15 increased slightly to 16% in 1998, despite a fall to 7% in 1988.
By female, 22% of teenagers who were 14 smoked in 1982 while 13 years old smoked only 7%. A 4% lower of 15 years old smoked than that age of 14. The percentage of 13 increased substantially from 7 % to 28% between 1982 and 1998, a rise of 21% in 16 years. The percentage of 14 increased slightly from 18 to 19 in 1998. However, only 3% of 15 years old smoked in 1988, after 10 years the percentage increased 10%
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-11-25 | Rayhan3268 | 67 | view |
- The first pie chart shows how energy is used in an average Australian household The second pie chart shows the greenhouse gas emissions which result from this energy use 73
- Solving environmental problems should be responsibility of International organisation insted of each national government Do you agree or disagree 84
- The pie chart and the line graph shows the workforce and the unemployment in Australia from 1996 to 2003 69
- There are social medical and technical problems associated with the use of mobile phones write about the form of problems that arise from mobile phone Do you think that these problems outweigh the benefits of mobile phones 84
- The first chart below shows how energy is used in an average Australian household The second chart shows the greenhouse gas emissions which result from this energy use Summarise this information by selecting and reporting the main features and make compar 100
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ifferent years of 1980, 1988 and 1998. Overall, it can be seen that the highest...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, so, then, whereas, while, as for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 7.0 157% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 3.15609756098 285% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 33.7804878049 130% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 998.0 965.302439024 103% => OK
No of words: 230.0 196.424390244 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.33913043478 4.92477711251 88% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89432290496 3.73543355544 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5578664907 2.65546596893 96% => OK
Unique words: 92.0 106.607317073 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.4 0.547539520022 73% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 267.3 283.868780488 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.2 1.45097560976 83% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.33902439024 207% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 8.94146341463 145% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.2606524254 43.030603864 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 76.7692307692 112.824112599 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6923076923 22.9334400587 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.46153846154 5.23603664747 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less 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: 0.343090422744 0.215688989381 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.164994233233 0.103423049105 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.150396140885 0.0843802449381 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.322790163662 0.15604864568 207% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.176377491749 0.0819641961636 215% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 7.9 13.2329268293 60% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 88.06 61.2550243902 144% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 5.2 10.3012195122 50% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 7.6 11.4140731707 67% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.2 8.06136585366 77% => OK
difficult_words: 25.0 40.7170731707 61% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.4329268293 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => 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.