There are several reasons why so few violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act were brought to court, but a major reason was that ironically the courts were often corrupted, making it impossible to for them to want to hear about a corruption case.
Psychology articles
For the first time, journal article reporting guidelines for qualitative psychology research are laid out in this open-access publication from American Psychologist.
The optional standards are intended to assist writers in honestly, openly, and clearly communicating their work.
The revised criteria, which were created by a working committee of the APA Publications and Communications Board, outline what should be said in reports on qualitative research, mixed-methods research, and qualitative meta-analyses.
They encompass a variety of reporting styles, qualitative traditions, and methodologies.
The article outlines these standards and their justification explains how they vary from quantitative research reporting standards and explains how authors, reviewers, and editors might apply them. advertising job openings.
Learn more about Psychologist here
brainly.com/question/12011520
#SPJ4
Answer:
Anti-competitive practices are business or government practices that prevent or reduce competition in a market. In commercial law this can lead to unfair (or disloyal) competition, a deceptive business practice that causes economic harm to other businesses or to consumers.]The debate about the morality of certain business practices termed as being anti-competitive has continued both in the study of the history of economics and in the popular culture.
The government would provide all farm-workers with jobs. A classes society would come after a brief proletariat dictatorship .
Answer:
Both Account A and Account B corroborate the Panthers' account by claiming that Panthers were at pizza place on the night the locker room was vandalized.
Explanation:
Given:
There are two statements given one by Panther quarterback's older sister and the other from the Bears running back.
Solution:
Corroboration is basically to compare the pieces of evidence and observing that where they agree and disagree. Many pieces of proof that say same thing makes the arguments stronger
So if we see both the statements, we can say that both Account A and Account B corroborate the Panthers' account. Both Account A and B claim that the Panthers were at pizza place on the night the locker room was vandalized. Both defend Panthers. In Account A Panther quarterback's older sister saying that she drove them to the pizza place and in Account B, Bears also says that he saw the Panthers at the pizza place. Both say same thing which makes this argument stronger. Hence Account A and Account B corroborate the Panthers' account.
