<span>People who tend to value social conformity, oversimplify issues as totally right or totally wrong, and consider their own ethnic group and themselves superior to others are said to have an authoritarian personality.
An authoritarian is one who favors/enforces strict obedience to authority.</span>
<span> they are interchangeable terms. </span>
<span>Money and Currency are the same thing. Nothing more than a tool which facilities trade.
</span>Which statement shows that money is a "store of value?
<span>a.I exchanged my dollar for ten dimes.
</span>Anything called money will be <span> backed by gold</span>
Answer:
confounding variable; lowered.
Explanation:
In the field of statistical analysis, a <u>confounding variable</u> is one that influences both the independent variable and the dependent variable. When an experimented is designed, the researcher wants to study the effect the independent variable has on the dependent variable. However, if there's a third variable that can influence them, it can cause a spurious correlation.
The psychologist wanted to test the effects using the new computer program (independent variable) had in helping students learn math (dependent variable). But when she divided the group in two, separating them by gender, she introduced a third variable (confounding variable) that wasn't accounted for when designing the experiment and that can influence either variable. <u>Because of this, the internal validity of the study has been </u><u>lowered</u><u>.</u>
Answer:
<em>I can see that there are no choices.</em>
fallacy of bandwagon
Explanation:
A "logical fallacy" refers to the error of reasoning or logical gap that makes an argument invalid.
The situation above commits the fallacy of the bandwagon because the argument is being supported only according to a significant number of population. This is a fallacy because it doesn't necessarily mean all of the retired persons are unhappy about the level of Social Security assistance due to the opinion of 30 persons who agreed that they were unhappy. It becomes a "standalone justification" of the validity of an argument. We cannot judge the happiness or unhappiness of all retired persons according only to a group of 30 persons <em>(even though they were chosen from different parts of the country). </em>
So, this explains the answer.
