In a procedure called random assignment, participants are placed in experimental conditions on the basis of chance, thus minimizing biases or preexisting differences in the groups.
Basically, the experimental condition is once the man of science manipulates the variable to assess its result on the variable. Below the experimental conditions, the participants receive experimental treatment whereas the participants within the control group don't receive any treatment.
Random assignment helps make sure that members of every group within the experiment area unit identical, which implies that the teams are doubtless a lot of representative of what's present within the larger population.
To learn more about Group here
brainly.com/question/15560909
#SPJ4
Answer:
The government can effect the bank by the interest fees and any other kinds of fees.
Explanation:
The banking system is cruel because the functioning of the U.S economy is making the loans and creating credit. ... The government regulates the banks to make sure the congress and others are being equal to others.
Selecting the head of government.
The name which is given to the response is to reclaim freedom by doing exactly what we were told we are not allowed to do when someone threatens our freedom is:
According to the given question, we are asked to state the name which is given to the response is to reclaim freedom by doing exactly what we were told we are not allowed to do when someone threatens our freedom.
As a result of this, we can see that there is a will to be free and independent and when a person tries to threaten those freedom, then there is a chance that the people would do what they are not allowed to do in order to reclaim that freedom and this is called reactance.
Read more here:
brainly.com/question/19037183
Answer: C In a 100-meter race, two of Amy's co-participants won Silver and Bronze and she performed exceedingly well; it follows that Amy won Gold.
Explanation:
There is a flaw in the evidence presented by the lawyer, several flaws actually:
- The client could have been the culprit and left the main door and garage open as an alibi.
- There is no mention of there being an altercation with a thief that cost the wife her life.
- There is no mention of things being stolen to prove that it was a thief.
The attorney used one logic and deduced a flawed conclusion from it so the option that is similar has to do the same as the above.
Option A is not applicable here as blame was taken by the perpetrator.
Option B is not flawed as one would be expected to be late in such circumstances.
Option C has a flaw because performing exceedingly well is relative. Amy could simply be performing exceedingly well in relation to past races. Amy's co-participants could have performed even better which is why they won medals and while Amy performed exceedingly well by her standards, it was not enough to win a medal.
Option D has no flaw. It is a logical deduction and argument just like option E.
