Answer:
Theory
Explanation:
A theory is a logical explanation supported by fact.
Hi!
Rivers:
Kasilof River, Copper River, Innoko River, Alsek River, Yentna River ,Gulkana River, Deshka River, Kuskokwim River, Chandalar River, Chitina River, Kanektok River, Aniuk River, Colville River, Naknek River, and Kobuk River.
Lakes: Alsek Lake, Kenai Lake, Twin Lake, Skilak Lake, Summit Lake, Goose Lake, Tustumena Lake, Portage Lake, Quartz Lake, Symphony Lake, Alexander Lake, Teshekpuk Lake, Mendenhall Lake, Selawik Lake, Auke Lake, and finally Crescent Lake.
Hope it helps ^^;
Answer:A. is challenging but still allows for proper form
Explanation:
When you want to increase strength you don't want to exhaust yourself but still you want to challenge yourself out of your comfort zone in a proper way.
You building muscles but you still want to ensure consistency without burning out.
Strength exercises challenges your ability to endure, for example holding a plank challenges your whole body and how long can you endure the position.
At the same time you have to do it properly to ensure that you obtain the right results .
If you don't hold it properly you may injure yourself or not get the desired results .
Answer: A. designating an anti-charity should be more effective because loss aversion will provide additional motivation
.
Options:
A. designating an anti-charity should be more effective because loss
aversion will provide additional motivation
B. designating a charity should be more effective because it avoids all potential for loss
C. it shouldn’t matter whether one designates a charity or anti-charity
D. self-interest biases generally keep people from choosing the anti-charity
Explanation:
The study of behavioral Economics shows that people are more driven by the loss of fear than the hope of gain. This is known as loss aversion. In commitment contracts where penalty money is promised to a charity or an anti-charity if the goal is not achieved, those who promise their money to an anti-charity tend to achieve their goals more. The same also applies when comparing this group and those who do not have to forego anything if they do not meet their target.
This is because giving to a charity will still seem beneficial while losing the money to an anti-charity will seem like a total loss.
