Many people use their phones for sending text more than talking. What are the reasons for this? Are there more advantages than disadvantages?
Use of mobile phones is becoming increasingly common these days, specifically for texting purposes rather for verbal communication. Apart from its convenience, I strongly believe that disadvantages such as communication gap, social isolation and lack of confidence are grave to ignore.
To start with, conveying messages through texting is convenient and easy, both in terms of time and cost which is also the prime reason for its popularity among people. For instance, a message takes approximately 10 seconds to write and send whereas if same information delivers by call ought take 10 minutes. Moreover, the cost of SMS is relatively less than that of talk time cost. Hence, it is agreed that the reason for inclination of people towards texting instead of calling is because of its time and cost efficiency.
On contrary to this, increased use of texting is the cause of communication gap. Admittedly, text messages lack emotions, and tone therefore, it is difficult to differentiate that either message is a joke, information or sarcasm. Conveying messages through non-verbal mode of communication is the cause of misunderstanding.
In addition, another important disadvantage of texting is social isolation which induced distress in people. People communicating through messages isolates themselves from public as a result the rate of anxiety patients’ have increased. Some psychologists revealed that people who prefer texting are more prone to depression that is an alarming situation.
Also, lack of communication develops lack of confidence. Undoubtedly, public speaking develops confidence either it is by telephone or face to face. Individuals are able to understand, evaluate tone of voice and communicate effectively.
To conclude, I believe that convenience of texting is overshadowed by its disadvantages of communication gap, isolation and lack of interpersonal skills. It is recommended that use of phones must not be restricted with texting.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 288, Rule ID: OUGHT_SAY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'ought to take'?
Suggestion: ought to take
...as if same information delivers by call ought take 10 minutes. Moreover, the cost of SMS i...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, if, moreover, second, so, therefore, whereas, apart from, for instance, in addition, such as, as a result, to start with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 13.1623246493 144% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 7.85571142285 25% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 8.3376753507 240% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1684.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 299.0 315.596192385 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.63210702341 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.36802084163 2.80592935109 120% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 176.041082164 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565217391304 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 540.9 506.74238477 107% => 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: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.1750103976 49.4020404114 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.0588235294 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5882352941 20.7667163134 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.82352941176 7.06120827912 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.38176352705 137% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.231244408173 0.244688304435 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0656070543235 0.084324248473 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0571664256695 0.0667982634062 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102398101105 0.151304729494 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0579969374018 0.056905535591 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.0946893788 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 50.2224549098 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.08 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
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.