Answer:
Reciprocal Determinism
Explanation:
Reciprocal Determinism
This is commonly known as the interacting rates of behavior, internal cognition, and environment. It simply explains how our actions are as a result of the environment, individual characteristics, and behavior.
Albert Bandura, a scientist that gave this theory did believed that behavior, internal personal factors, and environmental plays a role to all operations as interlocking determinants of each other.
An example is Children's TV-viewing habits( past behavior), which would influence their viewing preferences (internal factor), in which would influence how television affects their current behavior (environmental factor). The influences are always mutual.
Answer:
incorporation of the Bill of Rights
Hope this helps!
I believe the answer is: <span>self-image congruence model
In </span><span>self-image congruence model, we assume that consumers would choose a product that reflected their personal value.
This make the consumers think that buying the product could be used as a statement to define the type of persons they are.</span>
The correct answer is A. Both cases resulted in expanded protections for people accused of crimes. <span>The cases questioned the integrity of America's legal system and the decisions from the cases helped to ensure that the rights of the accused would be upheld while ensuring that the accused got a fair shot to prove their innocence.</span>
Answer:
This is an example of racial disparities in inheritance.
Explanation:
Some reseachers have noted that "the most significant aspect of multigenerational wealth distribution comes in the forms of gifts and inheritances" and that the lack of wealth and procurement of asstets among African Americans prevents them from making significant contributions to subsequent generations. 1
Therefore, Daniel is here at a disadvantage which is cause by a disparity in inheritance.
1 Bowman, Scott W. (2011). "Multigenerational Interactions in Black Middle Class Wealth and Asset Decision Making". Journal of Family Economic Issues. 32 (1): 15–26. doi:10.1007/s10834-010-9204-5.
