Answer:discriminative stimulus; operant response
Explanation:
One particular organization that fought for racial equality was the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) founded in 1909. For about the first 20 years of its existence, it tried to persuade Congress and other legislative bodies to enact laws that would protect African Americans from lynchings and other racist actions. Beginning in the 1930s, though, the NAACP's Legal Defense and Education Fund began to turn to the courts to try to make progress in overcoming legally sanctioned discrimination. From 1935 to 1938, the legal arm of the NAACP was headed by Charles Hamilton Houston. Houston, together with Thurgood Marshall, devised a strategy to attack Jim Crow laws by striking at them where they were perhaps weakest—in the field of education. Although Marshall played a crucial role in all of the cases listed below, Houston was the head of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund while Murray v. Maryland and Missouri ex rel Gaines v. Canada were decided. After Houston returned to private practice in 1938, Marshall became head of the Fund and used it to argue the cases of Sweat v. Painter and McLaurin v. Oklahoma Board of Regents of Higher Education.
Based on social psychological findings, it has been observed that when people or roaches undertake a difficult task, the presence of others <u>Impairs</u> performance; when they undertake a simple task, the presence of others <u>enhances</u> performance.
This phenomenon is based on Social facilitation theory. This theory described that people generally become susceptible to social influence by becoming more aware of evaluation.
The factors that cause this Social Facilitation theory includes the following:
- Size of the audience;
- Supportive audience;
- Hostile audience;
- Nature of the task;
- Individuals coping skills
- Venue of the event, etc.
Hence, in this case, it is concluded that the correct answer is <u>Impairs</u> and <u>Enhances</u>, respectively.
Learn more here: brainly.com/question/46360
We are learning about that......haha.... (lets get serious) ok so the answer is they were divided because Federalists were the one who agreed the constitution creating, the anti-federalists were the one who opposed or against the constitution.
HOPE IT HELPS (0,0)