Answer:
perceived behavioral control
Explanation:
According to my research on the theory of planned behavior, I can say that based on the information provided within the question the factor most likely to interfere with Tom quitting smoking is his perceived behavioral control. This is defined as the individuals perception of believing whether or not a behavior is within their control. If Tom does not believe quitting smoking is in his control, then he will not be able to quit regardless of how many people tell him how important it is to do so.
I hope this answered your question. If you have any more questions feel free to ask away at Brainly.
False, there are more than one accepted letter format.
Let's get further into learning this:
There are two basic groups, The Block Format and The Various Indented formats.
Stay Happy!
Answer:
TRUE The Statement is correct
Explanation:
We need to add up both advertizement contract to knwo the total acquisition cost of the advertizement.
<u>First contract cost:</u>
365 daysper year / 7 dayts per week = 52 week per year
52 week per year x $20 dolllar per weke = $1,040
<u>Second contract cost:</u>
12 months per year x $100 per month = $1,200
Total acquisition cost: 2,240
Individuals who give up looking for work because they don't feel that there are good prospects of finding a job are known as <span>discouraged workers.
Correct answer: D
</span>These type of workers have not found no suitable employment options in the past so they believe that <span>there aren't any jobs for them and they are</span> discouraged to search for a job.
Answer:
The correct answer is Inductive reasoning.
Explanation:
Inductive reasoning is a form of reasoning in which the truth of the premises supports the conclusion, but does not guarantee it. A classic example of inductive reasoning is:
- All the crows observed so far have been black
- Therefore, all crows are black
In principle, it could be that the next crow observed is not black. In contrast to deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning has the advantage of being expansive, that is, the conclusion contains more information than is contained in the premises. Given its expansive nature, inductive reasoning is very useful and frequent in science and in everyday life. However, given its fallible nature, its justification is problematic. When are we justified in making an inductive inference, and concluding, for example, that all crows are black from a limited sample of them? What distinguishes a good inductive argument from a bad one? These and other related problems give rise to the problem of induction, whose validity and importance has continued for centuries.
