Options and Decisions
Human life is rife with decision-making actions. The developed intellectual thinking and capacity explains why humans encounter the quandary of making decisions. Moreover, increasing life experiences and expanding options present us with augmenting decision-making thinking. For instance, when a family goes out to dine in malls, they are presented with numerous food retail options. Moreover, this is not limited to the food domain; cars, homes, the field of study, and even trite things such as a ruffle today presents humans with so many options. This huge presence of options today comes with its pros and cons. I partially agree with the prompt and argue mostly in favour of the prompt for few reasons.
To begin, more options available today in the market scenario presents buyers with a plethora of options to choose from. These increased options cause people to spend more time thinking and pondering over options before settling on one. For example, today Indian market has options available for many cars. Therefore, when a person goes to the showroom to buy one, he is posited with the problem of deciding which car is best suited for him. Further, this availability causes confusion and delay in making decisions as there's always a model better available.
Moreover, this confusion leads one to ponder over the decision endlessly leading to wasting of time. However, if limited options were available then the individual might not spend a significant amount of his time on deciding one option. This is not to say that when fewer options are available people do not think about their decisions; the decision-making process is still prevalent however, lesser time is consumed when the fewer options situation is compared to unrelenting options. Therefore, it is imperative to note that less availability of options does not equate to limiting of cognitive thinking capacities of human beings. Humans in such a situation will spend the appropriate time to think over several parameters of those selected options to derive a decision. This prevents just ponderance and propels the act of making the final decision. Thus, a thorough decision will be made.
When options are far more, avaricious behaviour may arise. The quest to gather more and more does not stop and humans fall into the labyrinth of greed. This gives birth to consumerism. Therefore, lesser choices will help to avoid growing acquisitiveness in the human population.
However, one may argue that lower options lead to the development of ignorance and limits human exploration significantly. As a result, human executive functions take a fall. While this is true but needs to understand that even in limited choices, one has to spend a good amount of time to understand and explore the given options. Therefore, instead of limiting frontal lobe functions; a humble alternative will allow one to think more deeply about the advantages and disadvantages of given options. And this will promote better decisions and lower buyer's remorse among the population.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 520, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: there's
...fusion and delay in making decisions as theres always a model better available. More...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 433, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'options'' or 'option's'?
Suggestion: options'; option's
... lesser time is consumed when the fewer options situation is compared to unrelenting op...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 551, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'buyers'' or 'buyer's'?
Suggestion: buyers'; buyer's
...will promote better decisions and lower buyers remorse among the population.
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, then, therefore, thus, while, as to, for example, for instance, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2550.0 2235.4752809 114% => OK
No of words: 487.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23613963039 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69766713281 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78834527936 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 249.0 215.323595506 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511293634497 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 807.3 704.065955056 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 20.2370786517 138% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.7331852673 60.3974514979 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.0714285714 118.986275619 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3928571429 23.4991977007 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.57142857143 5.21951772744 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.83258426966 248% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.330481501188 0.243740707755 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0942163002157 0.0831039109588 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0921883950785 0.0758088955206 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.195503870197 0.150359130593 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.109061522378 0.0667264976115 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.1392134831 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 100.480337079 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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.