universal risk-taking personalities
The reading and the lecture are both about “universal risk-taking personalities”. According to the reading people with this type of personality injure themselves with no reason and their behaviors must be considered illogical and in extreme forms pathological. However, the lecture challenges all the claims that the reading considers saying that the article was written many years ago and the perspective is no longer valid in the psychological field.
First, the reading establishes that risk-taking personalities are indicative of suicidal personalities. Nevertheless, the professor shows that risk takers' personalities have no relationship with suicidal tendencies. Moreover, he says that nowadays risk-taking personalities are considered positive skills attitudes.
Second of all, the paper states that risk-taking personalities endanger their lives with no reason except for their selfish satisfaction. However, the professor explains that there are physical and chemical rewards involved in the risk-taking actions that trigger adrenaline through the body generating more self confidence.
Finally, the passage states that this type of personality tries to cover up the need for attention. Nonetheless, the lecture clarifies this argument saying that according to new research risk-taking personalities have shown high levels of social and financial success.
- Some students prefer classes with frequent discussions between the professor and the students with almost no lectures. Other students prefer classes with many lectures and almost no discussions. Which do you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to su 78
- language 73
- comics 76
- universal risk taking personalities 81
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement People are never satisfied with what they have they always want something more or something different Use specific reasons to support your answer 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 317, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e considered positive skills attitudes. Second of all, the paper states that ris...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 270, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...levels of social and financial success.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, nonetheless, second, so, except for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 19.0 30.3222958057 63% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1186.0 1373.03311258 86% => OK
No of words: 193.0 270.72406181 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.14507772021 5.08290768461 121% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.72725689877 4.04702891845 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29442422272 2.5805825403 128% => OK
Unique words: 115.0 145.348785872 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.59585492228 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 361.8 419.366225166 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.55342163355 122% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.1996173451 49.2860985944 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.6 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.8 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.461237048241 0.272083759551 170% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.214381803273 0.0996497079465 215% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.16022819817 0.0662205650399 242% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.282791694132 0.162205337803 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0797261932688 0.0443174109184 180% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 13.3589403974 129% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 26.81 53.8541721854 50% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.39 12.2367328918 150% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.57 8.42419426049 114% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.