Answer:
united states
xq gracias a el texto te pyedes dar cuenta
Ancient Grecian Government
Ancient Greece was the beginning of democracy. In 507 BC Cleisthenes introduced a new form of government and principle which was "rule by the people" and leaders were elected.
This system was divided into three groups: writers of the laws, a council of representatives from each tribe, and courts where citizens argued cases before randomly-selected jurors.
Ancient Roman Government
Roman government went through many changes during its existence including city state, kingdom, republic, and imperial periods. Its main principle was that of "republic" in which leaders were elected and only for a limited time.
Like the Greeks, the Republican Roman government had three separate branches of government but they operated a little bit differently: legislative (makes laws) with the Senate and assemblies, executive (enforces laws) led by two consuls, and judicial (interprets laws) with eight judges.
Sara experienced no fear in response to the buzzing sound. At that time the sound of the buzzing bee was most clearly a(n): <u>neutral stimulus</u>.
<u>Explanation</u>:
Psychology says neutral stimulus is a kind of stimulus which never produces a response initially other than focusing attention. The neutral stimulus gets changed to a conditioned stimulus, when it combines together with an unconditioned stimulus. Neutral stimulus won’t trigger the response.
In the above scenario, Sara expressed no fear towards the bee. She was simply observing the buzzing sound. This explains that the sound is neutral stimulus and that doesn’t make any reaction in Sara.
Answer:
intangibility
Explanation:
According to my research on marketing, I can say that based on the information provided within the question this is known as the intangibility aspect of services. This describes services where there are no tangible<u><em> ( products that can be seen or touched )</em></u> product that the customer can purchase.
I hope this answered your question. If you have any more questions feel free to ask away at Brainly.
Answer: ethical lapse
Explanation:
An ethical lapse is an error or mistake in judgement that an individual commits which brings about a harmful outcome. It is usually as a result of an oversight as it really doesn't mean that the individual lacks integrity.
The scenario in the question is an ethical lapse. This is because the extra $25 she pocketed wasn't accounted for as it was an oversight and it wasn't that she intentionally stole the $25 or didn't account for it intentionally.