Answer:
Read the following
Explanation:
So Japan had a period of moderniziation (The Meiji Restoration Period) where they developed rapidly and managed to get a military and navy similar to the major powers. However, they weren't seen as equals to the Europeans. Now they weren't colonized because, they did isolate themselves but when they were forced out of isolation, they knew they had to modernize or they'll become like the Qing Dynasty (modern day china) and have imperial powers take advantage of them and there lands. So unlike Africa, Japan actually had a realistic chance of defending themselves from invaders, something that would make invading Japan costly. Not only that, but after 1900 it would be almost impossible to treat the Japanese like they did to Africa, as they rapidly grew a European like military and navy. Also, they were one of the 11 nations that sent troops to Peking in the boxer rebellion, which kind of showed how the Japanese weren't equal to the Qing Dynasty, at least in terms of military and navy as they were shown to be much stronger. Finally in 1904, the Russo-Japanese war begun, and while Russia had the largest army in the world at that time (in terms of troop count) the Japanese managed to invade Manchuria which was partially owned by the Russians at that time. Also, they destroyed the Russian naval fleet, ending the chance of Russia ever being able to invade Japan again (at least until WW2). So after the Russo-Japanese war, Japan was considered a great power, and most likely the next asian hegemony, which they were for a time in WW2.
What are the answer choices?
Answer:
2. America and Europe taking resources from Africa.
3. Because of Africa' untapped natural resources to enrichen the Empires of Europe.
I believe the answer is B
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
