Answer:
Isolates
Isolates are completely detached. They don't care about their leaders, know anything about them or respond to them in any obvious way. Their alienation is, nevertheless, of consequence. By default – by knowing nothing and doing nothing – isolates strengthen leaders who already have the upper hand.
Bystanders
Bystanders observe but do not participate. They make a deliberate decision to stand aside, disengaging from their leaders and the group. This withdrawal is, in effect, a declaration of neutrality that amounts to tacit support for the status quo.
Participants
Participants are in some way engaged. They clearly favor or oppose their leaders and the groups and organizations of which they are a part. In either case, they care enough to invest some of what they have (time, for example) to have an impact.
Activists
Activists feel strongly about their leaders, and they act accordingly. They are eager, energetic and engaged. Because they are heavily invested in people and process, they work hard on behalf of their leaders or to undermine and even unseat them.
Diehards
Diehards are prepared to die for their cause, whether that is an individual, an idea or both. Diehards are deeply devoted to their leaders or, in contrast, ready to remove them from positions of power, authority and influence by any means necessary. Diehards are defined by their dedication, including their willingness to risk life and limb. Being a diehard is all-consuming. It is who you are. It determines what you do.
Explanation:
The answer is letter a. Big business should be regulated by
government. Many progressives believed
that when big business runs unchecked not only does it destroy smaller
businesses but also increases the gap between the rich and the poor because it
tends to take all the profits leaving those who worked so hard with very
little. Sometimes big business left
unchecked can also resort to unlawful business operations that destroy lives.
<h2>Answer: D The management of publicity</h2><h2></h2>
The tendency to hold onto losing stocks in the hope that they will recoup is called loss aversion.
Loss aversion is a cognitive bias that explains why the pain of loss has twice as much psychological impact as the joy of winning. Losing money or another valuable item can feel worse than gaining the same. This principle is prominent in the field of economics. What distinguishes loss aversion from risk aversion is that the utility of monetary rewards depends on what has been previously experienced or expected.
In the realm of behavioral choice, 'loss aversion' is a behavioral phenomenon in which individuals exhibit greater sensitivity to potential losses than gains. Conversely, “risk-averse” people have an increased sensitivity/aversion to options with uncertain outcomes.
Learn more about stocks here: brainly.com/question/690070
#SPJ4
True would be certainly the answer
