<u>Answer:</u>
Telemarketers know that anyone who agrees to listen to a pitch is more likely to buy the product, thanks to the foot-in-the-door phenomenon.
<u>Explanation:</u>
- 'Foot-in-the-door phenomenon' is the phenomenon of persuading someone to agree upon a big request after them 'agreeing to a small request'.
- This phenomenon is based on a principle that when a person agrees upon a small request, there is development of bond between the requester and request.
- This development of bond will help the requester to make request agree upon his request.
- In the above case, if a person agrees to listen to the polite pitches of telemarketers, there is agreement on small request and the probability to buy a product will increase because there is development of bond between them.
Answer:
d) priority time
Explanation:
This is because, while maintenance time and discretionary time allows for the use of time for other non-judicious activities which an individual wishes to, priority time, on the other-hand, allows for the judicious use of time for important activities in any given particular day.
Answer:
Option “A” A fall in the price level increases the value of real wealth, is the right answer.
Explanation:
Option A is correct because there is an inverse relationship between price and demand of a commodity. If the price of the commodity increases, then its demand will decrease and the demand curve will shift leftwards. If the price decreases, its demand will increase and the demand curve will shift rightwards. Thus, a fall in price level and an increase in real wealth shows that people have more purchasing power. Thus demand will increase and consequently the demand curve will shift rightwards.
Answer: c. women's suffrage.
The Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the states and the federal government from denying the right to vote to citizens on the basis of sex. Therefore, it effectively established women's suffrage. It was adopted on August 18, 1920.
The amendment effectively overruled <em>Minor v. Happersett</em> (1875). In the case <em>Leser v. Garnett</em> (1922), the Supreme Court rejected claims that the amendment was unconstitutionally adopted.
