Answer:
Benefit
Explanation:
When products are organized according to what the seller thinks as valuable to the customer it is known a benefit segmentation.
Here, the mattress firm believes that the customers do not get enough sleep. This is the thing that the customers consider important according to the firm. Therefore they place sleep enhancing products at the entrance.
This makes it easier for the customers to find the products they need the most in a shorter span of time.
Answer: Volcanic (Wiki: The Ring of Fire is a region around much of the rim of the Pacific Ocean where many volcanic eruptions and earthquakes occur. )
Go with your gut though, not 100 percent.
Good luck =)
Answer:
Adaptability.
Explanation:
Theorists use a Circumplex Model to conceptualize clustering of different theoretical concepts from family theory and other social sciences - sociology, psychiatry, etc. This clustering revealed two central dimensions of the way people behave in family systems: Cohesion and Adaptability.
1. Family Cohesion:
is defined as emotional bonding of family members. It includes bonding, boundaries, time, space, decision making, friends, etc.
2. Family Adaptability:
is defined as the way in which a family power structure, roles, rules when they need to respond to situational and developmental stress. In this dimension the concepts of assertiveness, control and discipline, negotiation styles are included.
Answer: C In a 100-meter race, two of Amy's co-participants won Silver and Bronze and she performed exceedingly well; it follows that Amy won Gold.
Explanation:
There is a flaw in the evidence presented by the lawyer, several flaws actually:
- The client could have been the culprit and left the main door and garage open as an alibi.
- There is no mention of there being an altercation with a thief that cost the wife her life.
- There is no mention of things being stolen to prove that it was a thief.
The attorney used one logic and deduced a flawed conclusion from it so the option that is similar has to do the same as the above.
Option A is not applicable here as blame was taken by the perpetrator.
Option B is not flawed as one would be expected to be late in such circumstances.
Option C has a flaw because performing exceedingly well is relative. Amy could simply be performing exceedingly well in relation to past races. Amy's co-participants could have performed even better which is why they won medals and while Amy performed exceedingly well by her standards, it was not enough to win a medal.
Option D has no flaw. It is a logical deduction and argument just like option E.
