Its called a dismemberment benefit
Wanda makes an educated and accurate guess about her friends' behavior in a specific situation. in other words, she is making a hypothesis.
<h3 /><h3>What is a hypothesis?</h3>
It corresponds to an assumption that generates a statement that is deduced through a set of data and information, which is an integral part of scientific studies, which should be the basis for the research question that must be resolved at the end of the study, through the method of qualitative and quantitative data collection and of the experiments that will be carried out.
A hypothesis is a statement that may involve a series of biases, and cannot in fact be judged to be true until proven through the scientific method.
Therefore, hypotheses tested through science can increase understanding of a topic, whether their assumptions are true or false, generating greater reliability about an idea.
Find out more about hypothesis here:
brainly.com/question/606806
#SPJ1
Answer:
FUNCTIONAL FIXEDNESS
Explanation:
Martine is demonstrating an example functional fixedness, a cognitive bias that constrains a person to use an object only in the original function it was intended.
Answer: The situation is unconstitutional because it is defamation or libel
Explanation: The freedom of the press is guaranteed by the First Amendment of the American Constitution, which regulates all the rights and obligations of the media, including the press. This means that everyone has the right to freely report and write, and freely express their opinions without censorship. However, there are some limitations when it comes to press freedom. There are, among other things, the extent to which the journalist, i.e the writer of the article, can secure the protection of a confidential source, then also indecency. In this our case it is defamation which, when it comes to defamation in the press, calls libel. If Nancy wanted to make up a story about a politician she personally dislikes, then it is defamation. The First Amendment also does not guarantee the journalist the right to interfere personal feelings about the politician with professional writing in the newspaper. This means that if Nancy made up the story of a politician without real evidence of any wrongdoing, then it was defamation in the newspaper, therefore, libel.
