Discussion about people's behavior rises by enforcement or autonomously generated has got a fine boundary between two side`s advocators. Controlling behaviors play a vital role in any community ranges from a sale company up to a small community like a family. Besides the importance of controlling behaviors, the manner which should be taken into account to structurize interest behaviors play a significant role too. I believe people's behavior protocol doesn`t work based on force, for some reason which I would present here. First all it is not found that enforcement could have a persistence presence in all the times and in all places to control and adjust people, in the second, behavior of people originated from people's personality, culture, habits and etc... and in the last stage if the force factor is halted people's behavior will come back to its default state. So these points will help me to the role, not as a person who will agree with the statement.
As I pointed out, we couldn't have a continuous force to control people's treatment even if the investment in a community defines a task for us to try adapting other's treatment by enforcement. Let's suppose you would tell your students as a teacher in the class that it would not serve their right to cheat on you, without any further consideration to interpret the subject for them why you decided to tell them such a story. So they will get that they are not allowed to cheat up to there they sense your presence in the class and after a while even during an exam when you step out for drinking a cup of tea all the interest behavior even defined in the ideal state will be blown up.
Secondly, we have to pay attention to this delicate point which says, people's behavior originates mostly from their culture, their habits and importantly form their personality which has been created in the previous community, which they are from. So from the psychological point of view, we never could create a permanent treatment just by forcing an interest action, cause even if this enforcement factor not is halted it wouldn't be able to create a structured treatment in people. One may argue that exactly this factor, that you put it away plays a vital role in training systems. So I will present that maybe we could define some certain behaviors in some certain isolated systems like an army but totally the task which a soldier follows could not be defined as his or her natural behavior.
At last pieces of evidence always prove that, if the enforcement factor halted all the people who used to behave under the certain and defined enforcement, in some situations which this factor could not be present instantly, the person would make himself set to the default treatment. An intelligent instance here will be the driver who all the time was driving at limited speed just because of cameras which were monitoring him.
As a result, we should notice that we never have such an ability to define and structurize some certain behaviors only with the help of enforcement even if this tool is deployed by most of the organizations to control people's treatment. for people's treatment sources are fed up with their culture, habits and significantly their personality shaped in smaller communities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 762, Rule ID: AND_ETC[1]
Message: Use simply 'etc.'.
Suggestion: etc.
...om peoples personality, culture, habits and etc... and in the last stage if the force fa...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 22, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
... the statement. As I pointed out, we couldnt have a continuous force to control peop...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 191, Rule ID: LETS_LET[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Let's'?
Suggestion: Let's
...apting others treatment by enforcement. Lets suppose you would tell your students as...
^^^^
Line 5, column 425, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...his enforcement factor not is halted it wouldnt be able to create a structured treatmen...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 237, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: For
...nizations to control peoples treatment. for peoples treatment sources are fed up wi...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, first, if, may, second, secondly, so, while, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 54.0 33.0505617978 163% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 72.0 58.6224719101 123% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 12.9106741573 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2697.0 2235.4752809 121% => OK
No of words: 552.0 442.535393258 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88586956522 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84713113593 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69026496811 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 272.0 215.323595506 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.492753623188 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 846.9 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 30.0 23.0359550562 130% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 60.8397256915 60.3974514979 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 149.833333333 118.986275619 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.6666666667 23.4991977007 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.88888888889 5.21951772744 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.232917943576 0.243740707755 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0780156490578 0.0831039109588 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0473345821987 0.0758088955206 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129634530094 0.150359130593 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.046112238823 0.0667264976115 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 14.1392134831 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.49 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.67 12.1639044944 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.16 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 100.480337079 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.2143820225 125% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.