The correct answer will stress the differences between the observational study and experimental study - and options a), c) and d) can be true of both.
The correct answer is:
b. Experimental subjects are left free of manipulation
-this is the major difference between the observation and experiment.
The regime type of the government is indicator on whether the nation is in danger of genocide or not, an anocratic, or a transitional government, is the government that is in the most danger while a full monarchy, in the most stable.
A state is more likely to experience genocide or mass atrocity if they have a history of identity-related tensions, otherwise known as a tendency of othering,
States with low levels of economy development are more likely to have problems because it creates low opportunity cost for mass violence, as the citizen’s lives aren't valued as much as in an economy that has high levels.
Social fragmentation can by five major sub categories; identity-based social divisions, demographic pressures, unequal access to basic goods and services, gender inequalities, and political instability.
Explanation:
Antoine, a jury by profession is working on his first jury. And Antoine is sure that the defendant is guilty before the deliberations took place.
But to his surprise as the deliberation began, Antoine came to know that he is the only person in the jury who believes that the defendant is guilty, all the other member finds him not guilty.
As Antoine knows that the defendant is guilty of charge, he needs to show and prove other members that the defendant is guilty and no guilty person should set free. Everybody should be provided justice.
He speaks to the other members of the jury and discusses with them about the charges and the proves.
A group<span> of finance ministers and central bank governors from 19 of the world's largest economies, and the European Union. The G-</span>20<span> was formed in 1999 as a forum for member nations to discuss key issues related to the global economy. Hoped this helps!!!(:</span>
Answer:
Women's rights have historically been restricted by the Supreme Court using the reasonableness standard.
Explanation:
The reasonableness standard is used in US courts to understand whether a plaintiff or defendant acted reasonably in a harassment situation, for example, and it has been used in cases against police where the plaintiff claims excessive violence was used. There is also the "reasonable woman standard" that has been used in US Supreme Court Cases like Harris vs. Forklift Systems 510 US 17 (1993). The Supreme Court sided in favor of Harris who had to appeal two lower court decisions that found that Harris was not sufficiently psychologically impacted for the case to constitute harassment. The reasonableness standard can be seen as limiting because it imposes the standards of what men find reasonable in a sexual situation and coworker relationship at the expense of what women may find uncomfortable or inappropriate.
