The use of mobile phone is as antisocial as smoking. Smoking is banned in certain places so mobile phone should be banned like smoking. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some individuals believe that mobile phone should be banned like smoking in certain places because using them is anti-social like smoking. I believe that mobile phone needs to be kept under control; however, they should not be banned like smoking.
First of all, it is clear that mobile phones can cause some problems for society and they should be controlled in some cases. First, mobile phone should be controlled in some locations. In fact, 100% of the gas station prohibit mobile phones because sparks from electronic devices can cause vapors to explode. Besides, people must turn off their phone when they are on an airplane. The library also has regulations about limit phone noisy. Second, mobile phones can damage people’s relationship. This is because people are paying too much attention to the social networks such as Face book or Instagram. They use almost of their time using mobile phones instead of spend time with each other, they talking on the messenger more than talking face to face.
However, I believe that mobile phones have many advantages and they should not be banned in public places. The first reason is mobile phones is very necessary for contacting others.
Though mobile phones people can talk and see each other any time, no matter how far away. Besides, mobile phones are very useful for emergency situations. For example, when people see a robbery they can call the police immediately. Moreover, people can use mobile phones to work in public places because they are very convenient. They can check email on the train, read a newspaper in the car and send message for the work when they wait for lunch in a restaurant. They also can use the map on the phone when they are astray or travelling to different places. Hence, mobile phones should not be banned like smoking because they are not as bad as smoking and not directly effects people’s health.
In conclusion, mobile phones needs to be used in right way but they should not be banned in public places.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, hence, however, if, moreover, second, so, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as, first of all, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.3376753507 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1672.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 340.0 315.596192385 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91764705882 5.12529762239 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29407602571 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.37809350525 2.80592935109 85% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.479411764706 0.561755894193 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 524.7 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.8961935209 49.4020404114 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 83.6 106.682146367 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 20.7667163134 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.1 7.06120827912 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 3.4128256513 293% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.394892930857 0.244688304435 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.16482633879 0.084324248473 195% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.127620401804 0.0667982634062 191% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.30928993427 0.151304729494 204% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.112109893433 0.056905535591 197% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 13.0946893788 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 50.2224549098 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.3001002004 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.96 12.4159519038 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.08 8.58950901804 82% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 78.4519038076 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.