Answer:
1. False
2.True
3.True
4.false
Explanation:
Given that the difference surpasses the threshold level it means the experiment is highly significant according to statistics a p-value less than 0.05 (p ≤ 0.05) is statistically significant.
This shows that the null hypothesis is less than a 5% probability correct and the alternative is more than 95% correct.
Therefore, we reject the null hypothesis, and accept the alternative hypothesis as the correct hypothesis
Answer:
Forrest is better than Connie in abstract reasoning.
Explanation:
Formal operational thinker, is a term that describes an individual, speifically those from age 12 into adulthood.
Formal operational thinker are characterized by their ability to reason in an abstract manner or concept. It is often associated with ability to formulate ideas or hypothesis and test them to reach a definite conclusion.
On the other hand, Concrete Operational thinker are characterized by people often kids of age seven or eight, whereby they start to perform mental operations in a way that involves physical world rather than abstract concept.
For example, a child knows a primary 1 mathematics teacher who is tough, another primary 2 mathematics teacher, who is also tough, and the same is true for a primary 3 mathematics teacher. The child may conclude that primary mathematics are tough.
Hence, in this case, the right answer is: Forrest is better than Connie in abstract reasoning.
Answer:
I believe it is Federalism.
Explanation:
I hope the image helps.
Answer:
The 27th Amendment prohibits any law that increases or decreases the salary of members of Congress from taking effect until the start of the next set of terms of office for representatives.
Explanation:
This amendment was created to prevent members of Congress from giving themselves pay raises.
B) A concurring opinion asserts that two similar cases should be aligned and ruled on together, while a dissenting opinion insists that the case being heard is singular and unique.
C) A concurring opinion demands that all justices rule in the same way on a case, while a dissenting opinion explains the differing opinions of justices who ruled the same way on a case.
D) A concurring opinion explains why a justice disagrees with the majority decision, but abstains from ruling on the case, while a dissenting opinion describes the feelings of the majority.
Answer:
A)
Explanation:
The main difference between these two terms is that a concurring opinion agrees with the majority decision, but for different legal reasons, while a dissenting opinion explains why one or more justices disagree with the majority. Each of which tends to ocurr often in court cases where various judges analyze and pass judgment of another judges decision on a specific case. With a concurring opinion most, if not all, judges agree with the decision that has been made but tend to give different reasons as to why they believe the decision was justified.
Answer:
A: A concurring opinion agrees with the majority decision, but for different legal reasons, while a dissenting opinion explains why one or more justices disagree with the majority.
Explanation:
I did the quiz. here's proof:
Answer:
Check the explanation
Explanation:
Professor Boudreaux started working less as an economist that he was initially trained as and hiring the services of Dr. Bostwick which would make him have to give up to stop working and learn pediatric gastroenterology, which at best the outcome would have been all the same.
A. Dr. Bostwick was able to offer medical services that rarely or did not meet up or satisfy his own wants, so he traded those services for money which he later on used to purchase things that satisfied his wants.
Her argument about study alone is very strong. She probably have an average B, she made some C courses and because of this situation this makes her argument become a little weak because of that courses.