Some people believe that our ever-increasing use of technology significantly reduces our opportunities for human interaction. Other people believe that technology provides us with new and better ways to communicate and connect with one another.
The issue of whether or not technology reduces opportunities for human interaction is a contentious one. While each side has its strengths and weaknesses, in my opinion, technology provides us with new and better ways to communicate and connect with one another, because the primary purpose of communication is to pass information from one person to another. Furthermore, use of technology makes communication faster, convenient and cheaper, it also helps people to connect globally via internet and social media.
To begin, without communication, human interaction is almost impossible; for knowledge acquisition and to do daily activities information is required. In fact, use of technology has made interaction cheaper, faster and convenient with the invent of mobile phone, computers, internet, televisions, radios and all such devices. For example, a job seeker can easily get information about an opening in an organization via the company’s website or on Linked in and send application for the role, be shortlisted for a virtual interview and thereafter get the offer. From the above illustration, use of technology in communication helped the organization interact with candidates; recruit seamlessly, faster and at a lower cost.
In addition, technology has helped improve interaction in the buying and selling world. For instance in the 1980s’ a woman would spend hours in the market shopping for groceries and household items but with the advent of online malls, merchants have been able to reach the global market with myriads of products and services thus; consumers can easily interact with sellers, buy items online and channel effort to more productive tasks. Consequently, a Chinese merchant can easily interact with a merchant based in U.S.A, purchase items and sell them online without any face to face interaction. The above example further buttresses the position that use of technology has enhanced global connection and inter-racial interactions.
Furthermore, human interaction has been further enhanced with the use of social websites like facebook, twitter, whatsapp and instagram. Through these platforms, Lecturers, teachers, old schoolmates have maintained contact with one another, give updates on happening in their field of study and each member shares knowledge and experience. Moreover, these platforms allow has made communication better, one can easily make friends even globally and learn cultures of other countries.
Of course, some argue that use of technology can reduce opportunity for human interaction as they believe virtual communication is not sufficient enough to keep up a strong and solid relationship since “Out of sight” is “out of mind”. For a strong anf intimate connection in relationships, verbal and non-verbal communication is vital. At times, people’s reaction differs from their words and to understand such persons, decryption of nonverbal interactions is required. For example in a virtual conversation, even if the other party is telling lies the receiver will have no cue of this, but in a face to face conversation, one could easily decipher from the body language that something is not right. However, introduction of other means of communication like; Skype video call, webinar has enhanced interaction when conversing so that other nonverbal messages could be communicated as well.
In conclusion, although use of technology has reduced physical interaction between humans but it has helped enhance virtual interaction globally, made communication cheaper, faster and convenient, buying and selling is now being carried out without need for a physical structure, new relationships spring up and existing relationships blossoms. Isn’t this lovely?
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 14, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
The issue of whether or not technology reduces opportunities for hu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 73, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... human interaction is almost impossible; for knowledge acquisition and to do dail...
^^
Line 3, column 117, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'activities'' or 'activity's'?
Suggestion: activities'; activity's
...r knowledge acquisition and to do daily activities information is required. In fact, use o...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 237, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ion cheaper, faster and convenient with the invent of mobile phone, computers, internet, t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 526, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: A
...y interact with a merchant based in U.S.A, purchase items and sell them online wi...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, however, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, of course, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 32.0 14.8657303371 215% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 33.0505617978 51% => OK
Preposition: 80.0 58.6224719101 136% => OK
Nominalization: 39.0 12.9106741573 302% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3205.0 2235.4752809 143% => OK
No of words: 563.0 442.535393258 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.69271758437 5.05705443957 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87110059796 4.55969084622 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.21580314261 2.79657885939 115% => OK
Unique words: 299.0 215.323595506 139% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53108348135 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 1002.6 704.065955056 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.38483146067 274% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 78.4222248567 60.3974514979 130% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.619047619 118.986275619 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.8095238095 23.4991977007 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.19047619048 5.21951772744 157% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => 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: 0.336044012077 0.243740707755 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0974908729141 0.0831039109588 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0684947214715 0.0758088955206 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183280799316 0.150359130593 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.10530459983 0.0667264976115 158% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.8 14.1392134831 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 28.17 48.8420337079 58% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.1743820225 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.02 12.1639044944 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.55 8.38706741573 114% => OK
difficult_words: 165.0 100.480337079 164% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.5 11.8971910112 139% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.7820224719 144% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.