Recently, the impact of the design of buildings has sparked an ongoing controversy, which inevitably leads to a moot question " Whether design of the building will have a positive or negative impact on people’s life and work? ". Whereas it is a widely held view that the building's designs are highly beneficial, I will discuss controversial aspects of that throughout this essay.
From the metropolitan management standpoint, the building structures are bound up inextricably with the resident's convenience, which indicates they lead to both being well-designed and the quality of construction. As a well-known example, a longitudinal study conducted by eminent scientists in 2014 demonstrates the relationship between the performance of employees and the design of their offices as well as an exponential increase in task efficiency. Researchers, nevertheless, paid heed to the emergency precautions and the earthquake-proof constructions alike. Consequently, my empirical evidence presented thus far supports the contention that the likelihood of the inspiring effect of buildings is correlated positively with not only construction policies but also quality-based designs.
Within the realm of civil psychology, without the slightest doubt, the sense of security attribute to the formation of buildings, in that it would come down to towering skyscrapers and noise pollutions. A salient example of such attribution is affordable housing, which is a cause for concern since it was mistaken to take luxury designs for granted. Had there been a paradigm shift earlier, scholars might have had the opportunity to pinpoint the impact factor of buildings. Hardly had they confined their attention to building materials and even facilities. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the pivotal role of designing methods.
To conclude, as for myself, as the saying goes" all's well that ends well, " after analyzing what elaborated above I firmly believe that building designs are of high significance.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 105, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'residents'' or 'resident's'?
Suggestion: residents'; resident's
...ures are bound up inextricably with the residents convenience, which indicates they lead ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, hence, if, nevertheless, so, thus, well, whereas, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 6.10837438424 65% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 8.36945812808 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 31.9359605911 135% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.75862068966 208% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1720.0 1207.87684729 142% => OK
No of words: 303.0 242.827586207 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.67656765677 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17215713816 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.30818866345 2.71678728327 122% => OK
Unique words: 198.0 139.433497537 142% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.653465346535 0.580463131201 113% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 379.143842365 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.57093596059 108% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => OK
Article: 5.0 1.56157635468 320% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.5024630542 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 57.1860389917 50.4703680194 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.333333333 104.977214359 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.25 20.9669160288 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.75 7.25397266985 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
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: 0.392213147255 0.242375264174 162% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.11140839102 0.0925447433944 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.181305224372 0.071462118173 254% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231826447992 0.151781067708 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.22745569068 0.0609392437508 373% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 12.6369458128 142% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 53.1260098522 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.96 11.5310837438 138% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.87 8.32886699507 131% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 55.0591133005 209% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.3980295567 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.5123152709 114% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 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.