People nowadays prefer to interact online (e.g. do shopping, chat with friends) rather than talking to other people face-to-face.
What are the reasons for this?
Is this a positive or negative development?
In recent times, courtesy of the advancements and developments of technology, the world has become more digitally integrated. As a result, significant changes to the medium of interaction have taken place, alternating the communication preference of some people from direct chatting to online interacting. From my perspective, the phenomenon is going in the right direction and its prevalence can be justified for a host of reasons, which will be further elucidated in this essay.
First and foremost, the exponential increase in the ubiquity of online interaction and shopping is on the account of convenience. To specify, unlike going to stores and shops which could be time-consuming due to the long commuting routes and potential congestions during peak hours, shopping online only requires a stable internet connection and a smart technological device. Additionally, by using filters and add-ons online customers can buy products based upon their interests, locations, or preferences of price tiers. Combining with the function of applying several coupon codes at once, it is undeniable that going shopping on digital platforms is more flexible and reasonably priced than directly buying in-store.
Another major contribution to the increasing prevalence of communication is the efficiency in mitigating the spread of contagious diseases. To cite an example, due to Covid-19, coffee shops and other dining establishments have been forced to shut down. This has boosted the use of online communicating applications to meet up and catch up with friends and relatives. Moreover, in the past, it is highly probable that business meetings and seminars were likely to be organized under the form of face-to-face interactions. However, the pandemic prevention solutions strictures have become the prerequisites for the wide utility of online conference calls these days. By shedding light on this example, it is crystal clear that this notion will positively change the way people communicate in the future.
In conclusion, the reasons why digital communication has gained prominent ubiquity are on the basis of convenience and disease prevention. All things considered, it could be anticipated that online interaction will continue to flourish in the future.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, moreover, so, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 41.998997996 133% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.3376753507 216% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1926.0 1615.20841683 119% => OK
No of words: 343.0 315.596192385 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.61516034985 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30351707066 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20706864484 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 176.041082164 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612244897959 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 611.1 506.74238477 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.1940651562 49.4020404114 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.4 106.682146367 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8666666667 20.7667163134 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.33333333333 7.06120827912 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.271528489312 0.244688304435 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0734266157753 0.084324248473 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0483560940853 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135275666011 0.151304729494 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0570303061154 0.056905535591 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.0946893788 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.61 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.11 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 117.0 78.4519038076 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.78957915832 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.