• Law can change human behavior. Do you agree or not?
Recently, the phenomenon of regulations to standardize people's habit has sparked a debate habit. Although contested by many that it is governed by legislations, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am highly inclined to believe that controlling behaviors by enacting laws can be a pulse, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the sociological standpoint, law enforcement can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that smooth functioning of the nation, as well as infusing fearfulness in the public, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, I performed an academic experiment which discovered laws are imposed off to put fear on people to inhibition of offences. So, individuals will obey the rules and act in accordance with laws and also do not break it because of scaring to accuse of against the laws. Thus, beneficial ramification of both deterring criminal acts and developing habits apparently can be seen.
In addition, within the realm of psychological science, the frightened of punishments might increase the consequence of lack of confidence. Moreover, human nature is immutable and the laws will never result in the behavior changes. As a tangible example, a scientific research undertook by a prestigious university has asserted that the chaos in societies cannot be prevented just by laying down strict laws and governments should give awareness to people.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that there is a correlation between law and human behavior. Not only the advantages of being law-abiding prove the significance of regulations, but also pinpoint social norms implication.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 235, Rule ID: PROVE_PROOF[2]
Message: Did you mean 'proof' (noun) instead of prove (verb)?
Suggestion: proof
...nly the advantages of being law-abiding prove the significance of regulations, but al...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 299, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'norms'' or 'norm's'?
Suggestion: norms'; norm's
...f regulations, but also pinpoint social norms implication.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, in addition, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 6.10837438424 147% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 8.36945812808 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 20.9802955665 81% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 31.9359605911 147% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.75862068966 226% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1549.0 1207.87684729 128% => OK
No of words: 289.0 242.827586207 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3598615917 5.00649968141 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.19716068166 2.71678728327 118% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 139.433497537 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.647058823529 0.580463131201 111% => OK
syllable_count: 490.5 379.143842365 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.8648376573 50.4703680194 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.083333333 104.977214359 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0833333333 20.9669160288 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.91666666667 7.25397266985 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 6.9802955665 29% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 2.75862068966 254% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.22226907694 0.242375264174 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0719348348217 0.0925447433944 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.063346732403 0.071462118173 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121266017831 0.151781067708 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0179840096641 0.0609392437508 30% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 12.6369458128 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 53.1260098522 73% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.9458128079 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.1 11.5310837438 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.45 8.32886699507 125% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 55.0591133005 187% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.