Friendships that take place online are not as meaningful as those where people meet each other face to face. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is believed that meeting each other is more important than relying on digital communication so as to strengthen friendship bonds. In my opinion, I partially concur with this issue certain respects which I will explicate in the ensuing paragraph.
First, in this contemporary world, technological devices indeed set limitless boundary issues, particularly communication. Through social media such as video calls and messaging apps, our emotions and urgent information can be conveyed immediately. SAGE Journals revealed that instant media platforms enhance a sense of presence awareness where pre-existing friendship can be more solidified in real life. Moreover, individuals might seize a greater chance to develop intercultural friendship. As non-native students meeting different cultural backgrounds, advanced communicative apps enable them to explore shared interests along with revealing their cultural differences. For instance, Discord, a communication platform, provides room chat and voice chat to play with other gamers since 2015.
On the other hand, it is undoubtedly that direct conversation serves as the best experience to get along with one another, including facial expression and body language. It is proven that non-verbal cues may hinder friendship values from nuance and complex emotional expression. Thus, this results in either more effective personal or professional relationships. In addition, modern society should deal with privacy and security concerns, unauthorised access to sensitive information . This is because cybercrimes involving data leakage and identity theft unconsciously lead individuals to misunderstanding, embarrassment or even loss of trust.
Overall, it seems to me that stronger brotherhood values through face-to-face interaction would bring more experiences to avert individuals from lack of emotional intelligence as well as from potential reputation damage. That is provided that one should keep broadening his socially interactive relationship.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-05-22 | thaokim2003 | 61 | view |
| 2024-05-22 | thaokim2003 | 56 | view |
| 2024-05-21 | Mollymaul | 89 | view |
| 2024-05-16 | Mollymaul | 61 | view |
- The best way to make the road transport of goods safer is to ask drivers to take a driving test each year To what extent do you agree or disagree 87
- In many cities planners tend to arrange shops schools offices and homes in specific areas and separate them from each other Do you think the advantages of this policy outweigh the disadvantages 56
- In many cities planners tend to arrange shops schools offices and homes in specific areas and separate them from each other Do you think the advantages of this policy outweigh the disadvantages 84
- In many cities planners tend to arrange shops schools offices and homes in specific areas and separate them from each other Do you think the advantages of this policy outweigh the disadvantages 89
- Over the last few decades the media has promoted the image of young thin women as being ideal What problems has this caused What solutions can you suggest for this issue 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 96, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...t than relying on digital communication so as to strengthen friendship bonds. In my opin...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 484, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...thorised access to sensitive information . This is because cybercrimes involving d...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, may, moreover, so, then, thus, well, as to, for instance, in addition, such as, as well as, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1727.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 282.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.12411347518 5.12529762239 119% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.3118156596 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 176.041082164 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.723404255319 0.561755894193 129% => OK
syllable_count: 526.5 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.7717282705 49.4020404114 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.133333333 106.682146367 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8 20.7667163134 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06120827912 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => 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: 0.102007231944 0.244688304435 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0281357957237 0.084324248473 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0375684429979 0.0667982634062 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0619774878576 0.151304729494 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0240609301813 0.056905535591 42% => 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: 16.8 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.83 50.2224549098 55% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.9 11.3001002004 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 18.22 12.4159519038 147% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.91 8.58950901804 127% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 78.4519038076 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.