Answer:
Symbolic interactionism is a sociological theory that develops from practical considerations and alludes to people's particular utilization of dialect to make images and normal implications, for deduction and correspondence with others. In other words, it is a frame of reference to better understand how individuals interact with one another to create symbolic worlds, and in return, how these worlds shape individual behaviors. It is a framework that helps understand how society is preserved and created through repeated interactions between individuals. The interpretation process that occurs between interactions helps create and recreate meaning. It is the shared understanding and interpretations of meaning that affect the interaction between individuals. Individuals act on the premise of a shared understanding of meaning within their social context. Thus, interaction and behavior is framed through the shared meaning that objects and concepts have attached to them. From this view, people live in both natural and symbolic environments.
Explanation:
Answer:
Correct answer is They were weak and sometimes dishonest.
Explanation:
First option is correct as the Roman Empire, especially western part was very unstable. That was additionally upheld by the fact that most of them since the division of Empire in 395 had no authority and brought many wrong decision.
Second option is not correct as we cannot say that they were popular at all.
Third option is not correct, as one of the ways how we were able to see their incompetence was through the fact that they practically made no reform.
Last option is also not correct as people weren't directly choosing them.
The initial source of idea for the research is called the
world around. It means that the individual are likely to get the source of idea
from the environment or external factors that is used for the individual to
have an idea of what he or she is going to use for the research that he or she
is going to conduct.
The answer is "<span>She is a clumsy person."
</span>
The fundamental attribution error is our inclination to clarify somebody's conduct in view of inside components, for example, identity or aura, and to think little of the impact that outer variables, for example, situational impacts, have on someone else's conduct.
