<span>D) the site of a prison for anti-apartheid activists.</span>
The correct answer would be, Predicts.
Suppose Abby finds a significant positive correlation between the hours that a child watches TV and the number of aggressive behaviors the child displays in the classroom. She concludes correctly that TV watching predicts aggressive behavior.
Explanation:
When doing a research, researchers try to study the relationship between different factors to reach to a conclusion. Usually different variables are seen and tested, and if significant correlation if found, then results are inferred.
So when Abby conducted a research about the reason of aggressive behaviors in children in their classrooms, she used a variable, 'watching TV', and found that TV watching predicts the aggressive behavior.
This means that TV watching by children predicts and cause aggression in them.
Learn more about aggressive behavior at:
brainly.com/question/2034237
#LearnWithBrainly
Which* & the answer is the northern hemisphere.
This is a personal question. Therefore, only you would be able to accurately analyze how it is that you evaluate options when making a decision. However, there are some common strategies that people follow when such a problem arises.
One example of such a strategy would be making a pros and cons list. This allows the person to better understand the problems and benefits of each approach. Another strategy would be working your way backwards. This involves thinking of the desired outcome first, and then retracing the steps that might lead you in that direction. A third example involves talking to people who have faced similar challenges and asking them for advice.
Whenever a research is done, you must reject or accept a null hypothesis (the one you consider is not correct) or your work hypothesis (the theory you think is must probably accurate or close to the truth) usually, when performing a research, you will not always obtain positive or statistically significant results, that validate your hypothesis. Is actually, not unusual that extremes (or extraordinary results) come out (unexpected for several reasons: incorrect size of the sample, improper selection of the subjects- a bias- lack of correct determination of the variable measured or failure to determine the type of the variable-numerical, categorical, ratio,etc-)
Positive or negative results are yet, results whether they prove or reject your hypothesis. Failing to establish a scientific hypothesis does not necessarily mean that they did something wrong, it just says that the hypothesis tested does not approach correctly to the epistemological truth (ultimately, any research is only a mere approximation to reality). Therefore, when two scientists deny sharing<em> unusual results</em>, they are acting unethically, hiding results that can mean something from a different point of view.
reference
Nicholson, R. S. (1989). On being a scientist. Science, 246(4928), 305-306.
