Modern communication technology is having some negative effects on social relationships. What social problems are linked to this technology? What solutions can you propose to solve the problems?
Modern technology is within the ways to communicate, several of which are potentially social problems for interpersonal relationship. The following essay will examine these possible negative effects along with the practical solution I can propose.
Regarding to the impacts, one possible is less face-to-face interaction within society or environment. This is in consequence of addiction to which the frequent access of internet is preferable not only for leisure time but also on behalf of most activities to undertake, and thus people tend to playing gadget and being introvert. Secondly, another probable effect is that online conversation could heap social indignity. Such this modern communication allows people for being invisible on the screen and for liberally expressing themselves. Hence, this capability unfortunately raises the possibility of humiliating each other with no anxiety of being identified.
With the aim of addressing those problems, one of practical strategies is by pursuing hobby where the internet is unnecessary use and direct communication is main demand. The hobby could be seen on playing team sport in which other players should be involved. Thus, person will indirectly be conscious of the importance of face-to-face interaction within society. Finally, it is ideal to suggest that the government, as supervisor on the use of modern technology, implement the policy to criminalize people committing indignity. This is an objective of fostering general awareness of proper respect as a priority over social relationship.
To conclude, indeed, modern technology would negatively influence our social relationships, ranging from lessening interpersonal communication to committing humiliation acts. Fortunately, the key steps to deal with this could be taken by participating in social activity as hobby and supervising online conversation as a source of social indignity.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, hence, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.3376753507 192% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1629.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 281.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.79715302491 5.12529762239 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29669542987 2.80592935109 117% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 176.041082164 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.597864768683 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 524.7 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.2935057209 49.4020404114 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.357142857 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0714285714 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.85714285714 7.06120827912 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => 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: 0.213732109876 0.244688304435 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0718209076691 0.084324248473 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0710864539135 0.0667982634062 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153833810701 0.151304729494 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0854625719875 0.056905535591 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.0946893788 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.8 50.2224549098 51% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.36 12.4159519038 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.8 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 78.4519038076 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => 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.