Nowadays the way people interact with each other has changed because of technology. In what ways has technology affected the types of relationships people make? Has this become a positive or negative development?
In the recent times, with the advancement of science and technology, abundant modes of communication are becoming widely significant and popular. Many individuals use various interaction techniques with the development of technological improvements. This essay will discuss the various ways in which technology has affected relationships among people and why this has become an unfavourable development.
At the outset, the types of relationships people create nowadays are meaningless. Individuals ensure that they make acquaintances but not meaningful relationships. For instance, people have a plethora of contacts via social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Skype and a lot more, but these are not strong familiar relations. Even though the introduction of video call facilities tries to replace physical interaction, they fail to address the natural exchange of emotions between connecting individuals.
Although the development of technology allows people to interact using different modes, this has become a negative development since it deters the concept of face-to-face interaction. This means that the individuals do not witness trustworthy and meaningful associations. Furthermore, this creates a sense of loneliness since people do not have a moral support to rely on and they tend to become aloof. To give a clear example, a recent research study revealed that individuals having direct physical face-to-face interaction are much more emotionally healthy than the ones that lack this interaction. The more one-to-one interaction, the more is the relationship strong and healthy.
With the above facts clearly stated, it is evident that although technological advancements have improved interaction and communication among individuals, physical interaction and connection is essential for meaningful relationships to sustain in the long run.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, if, so, for instance, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 7.85571142285 13% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 41.998997996 81% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1616.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 270.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.98518518519 5.12529762239 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.39991930833 2.80592935109 121% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 176.041082164 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.592592592593 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 509.4 506.74238477 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.7255792879 49.4020404114 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.307692308 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7692307692 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.61538461538 7.06120827912 51% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.311643005195 0.244688304435 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104698312344 0.084324248473 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.085741897365 0.0667982634062 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.176966929428 0.151304729494 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0849674191913 0.056905535591 149% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.8 50.2224549098 51% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.46 12.4159519038 141% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.13 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 78.4519038076 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.