In recent decades, a growing trend towards dining out and eating processed foods rather than preparing homemade meals has arisen among youngsters, attracting a great deal of public attention. Although this trend appears beneficial in many cases, eating at home should still be highly encouraged.
On the one hand, restaurants and ready meals bring many advantages to the consumers. First, outstanding food and services served by restaurants could inevitably lead to greater customer satisfaction. For example, by dining out at international restaurants, customers are given a chance to relish a wide variety of cuisines, which increases their happiness level. In addition, purchasing convenience food would render customers less reliant on preparing regular meals, allowing them to save time and efforts. In fact, by eating these processed foods, such as canned fish, people will do fewer tedious chores like washing dishes or cooking, which gives them more time to work and relax.
However, there are certain benefits for those who favor cooking foods at homes. First, by preparing all the ingredients, people will be able to enjoy the meals without any concern for food safety. In fact, if customers purchased foods from trustful sources, chances are they would have a wholesome diet with essential nutrients, as there would be fewer unhygienic foods. Second, eating meals at homes requires the involvement of the entire household, which strengthens the family bonds. It can be implied that family engaging in homemade meals together would have a private and cozy space, thereby connecting the young with the old, ultimately leading to a happier family.
In conclusion, although dining out and ready meals offer some positive changes, cooking foods at homes is highly justifiable considering its overwhelming benefits. By striking a balance between these options, eaters will have more time for themselves and their family.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, second, so, still, then, for example, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as, in many cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1640.0 1615.20841683 102% => OK
No of words: 299.0 315.596192385 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.48494983278 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71213332315 2.80592935109 97% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.638795986622 0.561755894193 114% => OK
syllable_count: 494.1 506.74238477 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 5.43587174349 18% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.084088122 49.4020404114 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.142857143 106.682146367 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3571428571 20.7667163134 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.35714285714 7.06120827912 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.305613214069 0.244688304435 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0934491360327 0.084324248473 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0442289375349 0.0667982634062 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170722595488 0.151304729494 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0375368971979 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.5 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.75 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 78.4519038076 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.