I believe the answer is: Collective perspective
Collective perspective tend to make people stray away from individualism.
This would diminish people's drive to compete and beat other people who strive for a same goal. As a result, people with collective perspective tend to be less likely to obtain high positions and salaries.
The answer is<u> "Jamie has not used true random assignment to conditions."</u>
Random assignment alludes to the utilization of chance methods in psychology analyses to guarantee that every member has a similar chance to be relegated to any given gathering.
Study members are randomly allocated to various groups, for example, the experimental gathering, or treatment gathering. Random assignment may include such strategies as flipping a coin, moving dice, or allotting arbitrary numbers to members.
Note that random assignment varies from random selection.
When testing a hypothesis using a null hypothesis, you use a statement that negates your hypothesis, and, within a certain level of certainty, see if the null hypothesis can be rejected. When testing the null hypothesis, you typically want to be around 95% sure that you can reject it (confidence interval is 95%).
In Rose's case, she is testing the hypothesis that there is a correlation between watching violence on television and aggressive behavior.
Her null hypothesis would be:
"There is not a positive correlation between watching violence on television and aggressive behavior"
or
"The correlation between watching violence on television and aggressive behavior is less than or equal to zero"
