Many people believe that mobile phones cause more harms than the benefits and that’s why mobile phones should be restricted? To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give reasons to support.
Availability of newer and advanced versions of smart phones has led to an increasingly large number of people using them. Many people insist that these communication tools are more dangerous than beneficial and therefore, their use should be limited / discouraged. In my opinion, although use of mobile phones may prove to be risky under certain situations, overall they are a compulsory mode of communication and thus they are a necessity. Therefore, restricting their usage is completely unwarranted.
It is undoubtedly true that under some circumstances, using mobile phones can put the safety of a person in danger. In other words, there are certain situations where using cell phone is inappropriate and may result in the occurrence of grievous accidents or major injuries. Talking on phone or texting while driving may divert the driver’s attention and consequently he becomes less conscious /aware of the presence of other vehicles or people on the road. This often results in fatal accidents.
On the flip side, there is a strong argument against banning / restricting handsets. Firstly, a smart phone can prove to be a saviour in the event of unpredicted natural calamities like earthquakes. Under such conditions, a hand-held device facilitates communication between survivors and the rescue team. Likewise, availability of many navigation apps on modern smart phones may help lost travellers find the right direction. This often proves to be the difference between life and death.
Additionally, since most of smart phones are now equipped with the internet, we can perform various laborious tasks more efficiently. A mobile phone with high-speed internet connection not only saves time but also eliminates the need to travel. For instance, by using a smart phone a passenger can book the railway ticket from the convenience of his home. Also, these days, many financial transactions can be carried out on cell phone and this has eliminated the need to visit the bank.
In conclusion, I am of the view that even though the use of a handset may be dangerous in some cases, banning it is completely preposterous. In fact, mobile phones facilitate communication and increase our efficiency to perform many mundane tasks. If the users try to use the device more responsibly, it would prove to be a boon and not a bane.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-03-30 | Falola helen Oluwatoyin | 61 | view |
| 2019-02-18 | Dhillon Simran | 78 | view |
- The line graoh below shows the consumption of fou kinds of meat in a european country from 1978 to 2004. 67
- Do children behave better when tvey are punished or rewarded 89
- The diagrams below guve information on transport and car use in edmonton. 73
- Many people believe that mobile phones cause more harms than the benefits and that’s why mobile phones should be restricted? To what extent do you agree or disagree? Give reasons to support. 78
- Participation by 5 to 14 years old in selected leisure activities in Australia 41
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, firstly, if, likewise, may, so, therefore, thus, while, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, in my opinion, in other words, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1965.0 1615.20841683 122% => OK
No of words: 376.0 315.596192385 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22606382979 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40348946061 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05149412847 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 176.041082164 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56914893617 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 631.8 506.74238477 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.9072067975 49.4020404114 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.25 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8 20.7667163134 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 7.06120827912 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244955937956 0.244688304435 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0717671243636 0.084324248473 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0431494030203 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.139812449797 0.151304729494 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0301124882755 0.056905535591 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.0946893788 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.4159519038 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.