The graph below shows the number of hours per day on average that children spent watching television.
The given graph evinces medium hours per day spent by children to watch television. The vertical axis indicates this average vs. the horizontal axis which shows the course of 1950 to 2010.
We can see the amount of average modestly climbed from 0.3 at the incipient year of the period to just a little bit under 1 in 1960, before maintaining the same level by 1962. The medium amount experienced a considerable swell (4 hours per day) towards 1980, going through a tiny period of erratic behavior around 4 hours/day ca. 1981, before subtly slumping rather below 4 hours/day approximately in 1983. The amount of average climaxed slightly to a pick of roughly over 4 hours/day by 1994, afterwards mildly dwindling about three and a half at the end of the period (2010).
It can be concluded in the second half of the 20th century, the mean of number hours per day for watching television by children had astronomically been soaring, then almost slightly rising and falling erratically during the first 10-year of 21st century.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-10-04 | mamun25 | 61 | view |
| 2021-07-24 | sharad patel | 78 | view |
| 2021-06-02 | Ismoilkhon | view | |
| 2021-03-20 | Cuberates | 84 | view |
| 2021-02-28 | lili__nhnh | view |
- This tables show data about the amount of television watched by children in different countries hours per day and also the average academic achievement of people in these countries of people completing each level 79
- The plans below show a student room for two people and a student room for one person at an Australian university 73
- Parents should be held legally responsible for their children’s acts. What is your opinion? Support it with personal examples. 73
- In some countries owning a home rather than renting one is very important for people Why might this be the case Do you think it is a positive or negative situation 73
- The graph shows the number of minutes of three types of phone calls in Australia between 1992-2000.Summaries the information in the charts and make comparisons where appropriate. 100
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 106, Rule ID: LITTLE_BIT[1]
Message: Reduce redundancy by using 'little' or 'bit'.
Suggestion: little; bit
... incipient year of the period to just a little bit under 1 in 1960, before maintaining the...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, second, so, then, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 7.0 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 6.8 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => 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: 854.0 965.302439024 88% => OK
No of words: 175.0 196.424390244 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.63713576256 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67208700824 2.65546596893 101% => OK
Unique words: 112.0 106.607317073 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.64 0.547539520022 117% => OK
syllable_count: 243.9 283.868780488 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.9998851102 43.030603864 158% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.75 112.824112599 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.875 22.9334400587 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.625 5.23603664747 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.420953449243 0.215688989381 195% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.164874429534 0.103423049105 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.150694640893 0.0843802449381 179% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.266023890203 0.15604864568 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105720557908 0.0819641961636 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.2329268293 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 11.4140731707 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.06136585366 97% => OK
difficult_words: 35.0 40.7170731707 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.