Throughout the world, sharing scientific research results without cost has never ceased to draw public attention and provoke debates. Although, subscription fee for scientific journals access is prevalent, the issue as to whether they are profiting unfairly or not remains controversial. As far as I’m concerned, the disadvantages of making scientific studies available to the general public free of charge outweigh the advantages.
Firstly, it is important to recognise that the term of publicly funded studies means the research funding comes from taxes of citizens. Many may argue that the taxpayers pay the cost of different studies and have the right to access the results. This argument could be true to some extent. However, they should take into account the fact that while researchers may provide free access to their results by posting them on the web at any time, publication in a peer-reviewed journal requires extra cost since the results could be reviewed by a board of scholarly reviewers before it is accepted for publication.
Secondly, it is equally important to recognise that PhD students or candidates might struggle to find funding for their projects. As a result, they have to find funding resources from public resources. In case of all results of previous scientific studies are made available to the general public free of charge, funding resources could not be replenished and that might lead to money shortage for further studies.
Finally, researchers need deep brainstorming and long progress of laboratory work to solve the problem. Additionally, the outcome of the study might be not profiting since it is just proved in theory but the evidence could not be found at the time of the project. For example, Stephen Hawking spent nearly half of his lifetime and just to provide a theoretical argument for the existence of black holes emit radiation in 1974; scientists still observe and do thousands of experiments to prove the theory. Therefore, the result could not be freely available to the general public.
In conclusion, taking all of the above mentioned facts, it is reasonable to charge subscription fee or price to access scientific journals.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 217, Rule ID: WHETHER[6]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "as to"?
Suggestion: whether
...journals access is prevalent, the issue as to whether they are profiting unfairly or not rema...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 383, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ing scientific studies available to the general public free of charge outweigh the advantages....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 137, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun may seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much may', 'a good deal of may'.
Suggestion: Much may; A good deal of may
...h funding comes from taxes of citizens. Many may argue that the taxpayers pay the cost o...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 283, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...tific studies are made available to the general public free of charge, funding resources could...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 565, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...lt could not be freely available to the general public. In conclusion, taking all of the ab...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 23, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...eneral public. In conclusion, taking all of the above mentioned facts, it is reasonable...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, while, as to, for example, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1849.0 2235.4752809 83% => OK
No of words: 351.0 442.535393258 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26780626781 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32839392791 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86820876806 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.549857549858 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 554.4 704.065955056 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.6124906278 60.3974514979 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.266666667 118.986275619 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4 23.4991977007 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.4 5.21951772744 180% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.441673211797 0.243740707755 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140795800921 0.0831039109588 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.11471736916 0.0758088955206 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.235995222637 0.150359130593 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0876676943377 0.0667264976115 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.1392134831 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.1639044944 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.14 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 100.480337079 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.