Answer:
naturalistic observation.
Explanation:
Cal believes that a larger percentage of a city’s population will engage in public displays of affection in highly populated cities due to feelings of anonymity when an individual is among a lot of other people. He rides a bus in densely populated New York City for five hours straight, watches the bus riders’ interactions with each other, and unobtrusively counts the number of couples who are holding hands, hugging, or kissing. He then does the same in the sparsely populated city of Rock Falls, Iowa. The research method Cal used is known as naturalistic observation.
As we know that Naturalistic observation is a research method which is used commonly by psychologists and other social scientists. in this technique, it involves observing subjects in their natural environment.
Answer:
- If they really want to go together, Pat and Mark could make a one-week trip to the beach, and spend the second-week hiking in the mountains. They could also choose to go on separate trips, so each can spent the entire vacation in their desired destination. Or they could go together to one of those places and agree to let the other person choose the destination in a future trip.
- Given that it´s Pat´s money, She should be able to decide, and Mark can enjoy the result of whatever she chooses. Pat could accept Mark´s choice by making sure he brings something to the table, like being in charge of organizing the vacation, and make it to a place Pat really would like to go. They could also split the money and make a small trip as well as buying either the computer or the printer, but not both.
- Pat could try to change her behavior and use the opportunity to ask Mark to change something she dislikes about him. Or, they could just accept that Pat is just not an organized person, find something Mark is not good at as well. Let´s say, ironing his own clothes. They could agree that each of them will take charge of what the other person won´t do.
- It´s difficult to find a win-win resolution to this case because workers have a legal right to assemble and fight for fair wages. Management could concede on a lower raise as long as they can offer some other perks, like providing food for their employers.
Explanation:
Personally, win-win strategies help me understand that when resolving conflicts one must consider the other side´s needs and be willing to compromise. I usually become a little stubborn when in such a situation, focusing on how I´m right and others should accept that. Trying to come with win-win solutions will probably help me get better results and keep relationships healthy.
Best guess for me is C : <span>a rise in spending on welfare programs </span>
This would be an example of "pluralistic ignorance".
In social psychology, pluralistic ignorance is a circumstance in which a larger part of gathering individuals secretly dismiss a standard, yet mistakenly expect that most others acknowledge it, and thusly oblige it. This is likewise portrayed as "nobody accepts, however everybody feels that everybody accepts".
