The answer is: C. Unlike fixed interval reinforcement schedules, with variable interval reinforcement schedules, the time between a behavior and the following consequences varies around a specified average.
When the researchers conduct a fixed interval reinforcement schedules , the reward for a certain behavior would be given after a specific amount of time has passed.
When they conduct variable interval reinforcement schedules, the reward will be given within unpredictable time frame. Because the reward time is unpredictable, there is no expectation between the subject after the subject did the desired behavior. This will make the time between a behavior and the following consequences varies around a specified average depending on the subject's characteristic.
Answer:
A
Explanation:
That evidence directly proves that harm occured versus the other ones which just add additional information.
Answer:
By increasing the amount and so do cell phone consumers, so the price reaches equilibrium.
Explanation:
The law of supply and demand says that if the supply increases, the price or demand may decrease, and if supply decreases, the price or demand may increase. <em>And the reality is that today there is a great deal of supply and variety of cell phones with which a greater amount is acquired by consumers, bringing the price to its equilibrium.
</em>
The number of consumers who can afford a high-end smart phone is less, and in reality it does not affect the equilibrium price much, even due to the fact that several consumers purchase cell phones in rental or credit plans.
Answer:
Saint Benedict, founder of the Benedictine monastery at Monte Cassino and ... the rule that he established became the norm for monastic living throughout Europe. ... Get exclusive access to content from our 1768 First Edition with your subscription. ... The district was still largely pagan, but the people were converted by his ...
The correct answer is It was used to breakup companies that brought other companies to eliminate them as competition
Much of the doctrine, in commenting on the historical facts that gave rise to the Sherman Act, often states that the United States, in the late nineteenth century, was witnessing the emergence of large monopolies and cartels in various sectors of the economy, which were abusing their market power and consequently harming consumers.
