Nowadays, the way many people interact with each other has changed because of technology. In what ways has technology affected the type of relationships people make? Has this become a positive or negative development?
One of the highly debatable issues, today, is whether human interaction has been altered due to technological advances is positive or negative. This essay will shed some lights on how these innovations have transformed the connectivity among people and demonstrate why this progress is, by and large, detrimental.
With respect to the first question, people’s cycle of friends has been affected in a number of different ways. The proliferation of social network has enabled users to widen their friendship, just by sending innumerable friend requests and waiting for acceptance. That is the primary reason why one can have up to 5,000 friends on the Internet, in comparison with a moderate number in the past. In terms of communication, the explosion of Internet-based conversations, such as emails or video calls, is mainly responsible for the shortage of face-to-face interaction. In fact, people are taking advantage of online platforms, most of which are totally free and handy, in lieu of engaging in lengthy and costly commutes to organize real-life meetings.
However, I am inclined to the view that certain detriments are associated with changes in the way of interaction. First and foremost, the over-reliance on virtual communication leads to a decline in social skills which are crucial for personal growth. It is not uncommon for a heavy-social-network user to feel awkward when trying to strike up a conversation with strangers or making small talks in front of the crowd. Another threat would be a great sense of solitude when being surrounded by thousands of virtual friends but hardly finding anyone to confide in. In other words, the direct interaction, in which people are easily conspicuous of other’s interests and hobbies, plays an indispensable part in creating and maintaining a true relationship.
By way of conclusion, technology has revolutionized how we relate to each other. And I firmly believe that its drawbacks outweigh much more than the fruits of these new relationships.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-12-21 | lilyngan | 78 | view |
| 2020-12-13 | diemhang1612 | 89 | view |
- Many people say the gap between rich and poor people is wider as rich people become richer and poor people grow poorer What problems could this situation cause and what measures can be done to address those problem 84
- The graph below shows the number of tourists visiting a particular Caribbean island between 2010 and 2017 89
- 11
- In the future nobody will buy printed newspapers or books because they will be able to read everything they want online without paying To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 89
- The diagram below shows the development of cutting tools in the Stone Age 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, so, in fact, such as, by and large, in other words, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 41.998997996 138% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1696.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 319.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31661442006 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.26753151742 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 176.041082164 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.64263322884 0.561755894193 114% => OK
syllable_count: 518.4 506.74238477 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.2401004728 49.4020404114 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.142857143 106.682146367 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7857142857 20.7667163134 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.57142857143 7.06120827912 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213666833879 0.244688304435 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0637008225829 0.084324248473 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0664872645774 0.0667982634062 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116875157651 0.151304729494 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0282198449979 0.056905535591 50% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 50.2224549098 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.97 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 78.4519038076 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.