Answer:
The empirical study of democratic regimes in the last fifty years has focused on the question of what makes for stable democracies.[1] Various hypotheses have been put forward and tested about the social and political conditions under which democratic regimes come to be or to endure. A presupposition of most of this research is that democratic regimes are particularly fragile. The supposition that democracies are fragile probably has a number of sources. The frightening experience of the descent of European democracies into fascism and communism is perhaps the most important. But we can also find support for this presupposition in the evident fragility of democratic regimes in the less developed world. And, standing behind these events, is the long standing tradition in political philosophy—and especially, in pre-modern political thought—of disparaging democracy and warning that it is likely to lead to tyranny.
We do not dispute the notion that democratic regimes are fragile. But we observe that all political regimes are fragile. Political stability is by no means the norm in human history. The question thus becomes whether democratic regimes are more fragile than authoritarian regimes. This, we believe, remains a much ignored and thus open question.
The aim of this paper is to present a preliminary exploration of this issue. We present some initial empirical data that address the relative stability of authoritarian and democratic regimes. But, before we begin to attempt to test the hypothesis that democratic regimes are at least as stable than authoritarian ones, if not more so, we must first answer some preliminary questions about the conceptual and operational definitions of the notions of democracy, authoritarianism and stability. This is the task of parts II and III of the paper. We more briefly discuss our data and statistical methods in parts IV and V of the paper and present some initial results in part VI. We begin, in part I, with some theoretical reasons for thinking that democratic regimes might be quite as stable as authoritarian ones.
Explanation:
Answer:
b. Whether or not relaxation exercises may cause alleviation of symptoms of test anxiety.
Explanation:
Dr. Prather randomized students who experience anxiety before exams, therefore<em> the idea isn´t to know how effective the waiting time is since otherwise</em>, he would have done an exercise about the waiting time mainly (a).
The problem is not how students behave anxiously before exams, <em>rather if relaxation exercises can help reduce anxiety. </em>(C )
The fragment only mentions students with anxiety, <em>doesn´t refer to other mood disorders</em> (d)
Therefore, according to the results, Dr. Prather will have evidence of whether relaxation exercises may or may not cause alleviation of symptoms of test anxiety, by making a comparison between students who received training in relaxation exercises and those who were in the waiting area and therefore didn´t receive the training.
Answer:
A major goal of the <u><em>ecological</em></u> approach to perception is to determine how movement creates perceptual information that both guides further movement and helps observers perceive the environment.
Explanation:
The Ecological Approach is an attempt to understand how the natural factors affect living beings, how living beings interact with these elements and what would be the consequences of it. Then based on this analysis and the results, what path must be taken.
Puberty doesn't have theories.
Divided between the national and state governments
