"In the modern world, it is possible to shop,work and communicate with people via the internet without any face-to-face contact with others. To what extent is this a positive or negative development?""In the modern world, it is possible to shop,work and communicate with people via the internet without any face-to-face contact with others. To what extent is this a positive or negative development?"
Nowadays communication using modern technology is becoming more and more popular. Interpersonal relations are being replaced with online chats and Skype calls. Shopping, work, education, all can be done using the internet. On the one side, I believe it has many advantages as makes the world and its resources more accessible but on the other, it negatively affects our social interactions.
Growing popularity of internet transferred many of our communications from face-to-face to online platforms. Most people are fluent in using WhatsApp, has an Amazon in Prime account and posts videos on Tick Tock. But there are disadvantage to this growing trend that can not be omitted. All of these applications reduce real-life communication. As a result feedback, we naturally and instantly receive while interacting with others is missing. This evenement results in reduced development of social skills, like empathy, reading facial expression and body language. Furthermore, it might even result in panic disorders and social anxiety triggered by a sudden need of real-life communication.
But advantages are by far more prominent. Development of the internet made the world more accessible. Work meetings can be run across the world simultaneously, shopping can be done with a few clicks. This progress has opened up a new possibilities for all, but most evidently for disabled people, as they can have access to resources previously unavailable eg, online shopping, virtual tours etc. The value of development of the internet has become particularly obvious recently when the world faced Covid-19 pandemic and face-to-face communication has been often impossible, at best restricted. Thanks to online services vulnerable people have been able to purchase their food, families have stayed close together and for children, it has been possible to access education.
In conclusion, even though the reduction of face-to-face contact might reduce people's interpersonal skills, it is a risk worth taking as opportunities coming with the development of online services, are by far more valuable. Access to the internet lets people experience the world in the ways previously inaccessible.
- 3 spreads 73
- Many offenders commit more crimes after serving their first punishment Why is this happening and measures can be taken to tackle the problem 89
- In the modern world it is possible to shop work and communicate with people via the internet without any face to face contact with others To what extent is this a positive or negative development In the modern world it is possible to shop work and communi 84
- Nowadays we re producing more and more rubbish Why do you think this is happening What can the government do to help reduce amount of rubbish 78
- GOVERNMENT SHOULD FUND SCIENTIFIC RATHER THAN COMMERCIAL ORGANIZATION TO WHAT EXTENT DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE STATEMENT 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 235, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'possibility'?
Suggestion: possibility
...icks. This progress has opened up a new possibilities for all, but most evidently for disable...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, if, so, while, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1859.0 1615.20841683 115% => OK
No of words: 333.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.58258258258 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16830337158 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.585585585586 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 592.2 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 52.6269998008 49.4020404114 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.8421052632 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5263157895 20.7667163134 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.10526315789 7.06120827912 44% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.304890454066 0.244688304435 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0784784969592 0.084324248473 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0591935177151 0.0667982634062 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.176364278079 0.151304729494 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0497047920887 0.056905535591 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.0946893788 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 50.2224549098 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.79 12.4159519038 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 78.4519038076 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.