Nowadays the way many people interact with each other has changed because of technology. In what ways has technology affected the types of relationships that people made? has this been a positive or negative development?
Today, technology has revolutionized communication ways in many cases. In this respect, people's social life and business relationships have been affected noticeably and involved both positive and negative impacts.
The advancement of technology has influenced human interactions in diverse ways. To begin with, with the arrival of the Internet, the way many make friendship with others has changed significantly. Some Internet-based platforms such as social media and messengers have introduced the concept of virtual friendship. By using such tools, people have been able to find some friends who share common interests, even though they may never meet them in close. In addition, technology has also changed people's business relationships. It has allowed business people to connect around the globe without any interference or dependency. They have been able to cooperate in some projects with other experts and traders via some online services like email and video calls.
The changes above can be considered as both positive either negative developments. On the one hand, technology has made the way many interact much more convenient. In other words, nowadays, everyone can reply to others from each corner of the world faster and easier compared to past decades. This, in turn, has created many benefits in work and social context for individuals. On the other hand, technology negatively has affected face-to-face connections, and friendly get-together seems to be disrupted. That in some emerged applications and media such as Whatsapp or Facebook derived people make virtual friendships rather than mix with their peers in the real world, consequently making people less sociable and more isolated.
In conclusion, technology has impacted many people's social and business interactions by introducing virtual relationships and cooperations, respectively. However, all the developments mentioned above are not favorable.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, however, if, may, so, in addition, in conclusion, such as, in many cases, in other words, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 24.0651302605 29% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1651.0 1615.20841683 102% => OK
No of words: 288.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.73263888889 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08459801078 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.607638888889 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 517.5 506.74238477 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.3932353282 49.4020404114 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.1176470588 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.9411764706 20.7667163134 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.35294117647 7.06120827912 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.434600839366 0.244688304435 178% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127037289753 0.084324248473 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0791560911542 0.0667982634062 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.269788040012 0.151304729494 178% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0522715673839 0.056905535591 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.31 50.2224549098 76% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.66 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.