how widespread

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "how widespread" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to inquire about the extent or prevalence of something in a particular context. Example: "The study aims to determine how widespread the issue of food insecurity is in urban areas."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Science

Formal & Business

Academia

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

60 human-written examples

How widespread is it?

Independent

How widespread are such practices?

The Economist

How widespread is modern slavery?

The Guardian - Opinion

How widespread was the movement?

The New Yorker

How widespread is night working?

Independent

How widespread are violations?

Columbia University

"How widespread was that?

The New York Times

But just how widespread is the practice?

The Guardian - Opinion

How widespread is support for the rebels?

Independent

How widespread is cervical cancer?

The Guardian - Lifestyle

How widespread have muni bond defaults been?

The New York Times

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When using "how widespread", ensure you are clear about the specific phenomenon or issue you are inquiring about. Providing context helps the reader understand the scope of your question.

Common error

Avoid using "how widespread" without specifying the context. For example, instead of asking "How widespread is it?", specify "How widespread is the use of AI in healthcare?" for clarity.

Linguistic Context

The phrase "how widespread" functions as an interrogative phrase, typically used to inquire about the extent, prevalence, or distribution of a phenomenon, issue, or practice. As seen in Ludwig, it commonly introduces questions seeking information about the scale of something.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

60%

Science

20%

Academia

10%

Less common in

Formal & Business

8%

Encyclopedias

1%

Wiki

1%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

In summary, "how widespread" is a frequently used interrogative phrase that serves to question the extent or prevalence of various phenomena. As Ludwig AI confirms, the phrase is grammatically correct and widely applicable across diverse contexts. Its versatility makes it suitable for neutral and professional communications, while its frequent appearance in news, science, and academic sources underscores its value in information gathering and assessment. To enhance clarity in writing, specifying the context is recommended. Overall, this phrase is a valuable tool for exploring the scope of issues.

More alternative expressions

Phrases that express similar concepts, ordered by semantic similarity:

how prevalent

Replaces "widespread" with a synonym, focusing on common occurrence.

how common

Simpler alternative, emphasizing frequency of occurrence.

to what extent

Shifts focus to the degree or scope of something.

how extensive

Highlights the breadth and reach of something.

what is the scale

Emphasizes the size or magnitude of something.

how far-reaching

Focuses on the impact and influence of something.

what is the reach

Asks about the scope of influence or effect.

how pervasive

Emphasizes the deep and thorough spread of something.

how rampant

Suggests an uncontrolled or flourishing spread.

what is the magnitude

Focuses on the size and importance of the issue.

FAQs

How can I use "how widespread" in a sentence?

You can use "how widespread" to inquire about the extent or prevalence of something. For example: "How widespread is the use of renewable energy in the country?"

What are some alternatives to "how widespread"?

You can use alternatives like "how prevalent", "how common", or "to what extent" depending on the specific nuance you want to convey.

Is it better to use "how widespread" or "how common"?

Both "how widespread" and "how common" are valid, but "how widespread" often implies a broader scope or impact, while "how common" simply refers to frequency.

What is the difference between "how widespread" and "what is the scale of"?

"How widespread" generally refers to the distribution or prevalence of something, whereas "what is the scale of" focuses on the size or magnitude of something. They can be used interchangeably in some contexts, but "what is the scale of" emphasizes the quantitative aspect.