Answer:
The correct option for a case where is required "brand or equal" is the following:
Option A) "Shifts responsibility for establishing equality or superiority to the bidder"
Explanation:
When a "brand or equal" is required by the specifiers, they are putting the responsibility on the bidder side to find an equal or superior specifications item as required. They must provide enough evidence to the offeror that they are finding the right item or brand as required.
Answer:
Stanford Prison.
Explanation:
This value was brought up to notice by Philip Zimbardo and some of his colleagues in the year 1973. They were interested in finding out whether the brutality reported among guards in American prisons was due to the sadistic personalities of the guards or had more to do with the prison environment.
Alternatively, prisoners and guards may behave in a hostile manner due to the rigid power structure of the social environment in prisons.
If the students now complete their homework, and the teacher no longer complains to the parents. This is an example of: Negative reinforcement.
<h3>What is Negative reinforcement?</h3>
Negative reinforcement can be defined as the process of using reinforcer to remove behavior that are unpleasant or undesiring behavior that are not acceptable.
Based on the given scenario the teacher is using negative reinforcement to stop the student unpleasant behavior so as to enables the students to always complete their homework,
Inconclusion this is an example of: Negative reinforcement.
Learn more about Negative reinforcement here:brainly.com/question/326299
Answer:
In some situations, don't go outside, stay indoors and take shelter. Seek help and assistance if needed.
Answer:
The possible answers are:
A
. Yes, because his actions constituted an unlawful operation of the construction equipment.
B. Yes, because he was intoxicated while attempting to move the construction equipment.
C. No, because at most he could be found guilty of criminal negligence.
D. No, because he must have been aware that his conduct would cause the damage to the trailer in order to be found guilty of reckless damage.
The correct answer is:
B. Yes, because he was intoxicated while attempting to move the construction equipment.
Explanation:
The worker should be found guilty, since he was aware of being intoxicated from the beginning of the action, knowing in advance that when operating the heavy construction equipment there would be a great threat for the people and properties around. Besides, he was also aware about the alarming signs, due to the fact that he could not reach the dum truck normally, he had to jump the fence to reach it, increasing the risk with his actions.
