She has a Parasocial interaction (PSI). This phenomenon offers an explanation of how society establishes a one-sided relationship with people who appear in the media. People may feel that they have a close relationship with people they have seen and followed in the media, such as actors or musicians, and consider that the relationship is reciprocal and that the other person addresses them directly.
I hope my answer can help you.
Answer:
d) The importance of visual cues in speech processing
Explanation:
This question is incomplete. The options for this question are:
a) Coarticulation
b) Phonemic restoration
c) Word boundary effects
d) The importance of visual cues in speech processing
When we communicate with one another we are usually using different visual cues during our speech to help the other person understand and get a better understanding of what we are saying and by our gestures we also increase the interest of our audience in what we are saying.
In this example, Heather notes that it's easier to understand her sister's speech on Skype than on telephone. It is clear that <u>when we're on the telephone we really don't see the person or their cues and gestures</u>, and we do see those when we are in Skype. These cues help us understand the speech better because these physical cues help us guide us through the speech. Therefore, the phenomenon may be an illustration of d) The importance of visual cues in speech processing
Bolivar stood apart from his class in ideas, values and vision. Who else would be found in the midst of a campaign swinging in a hammock, reading the French philosophers? His liberal education, wide reading, and travels in Europe had broadened his horizons and opened his mind to the political thinkers of France and Britain. He read deeply in the works of Hobbes and Spinoza, Holbach and Hume; and the thought of Montesquieu and Rousseau left its imprint firmly on him and gave him a life-long devotion to reason, freedom and progress. But he was not a slave of the Enlightenment. British political virtues also attracted him. In his Angostura Address (1819) he recommended the British constitution as 'the most worthy to serve as a model for those who desire to enjoy the rights of man and all political happiness compatible with our fragile nature'. But he also affirmed his conviction that American constitutions must conform to American traditions, beliefs and conditions.
His basic aim was liberty, which he described as "the only object worth the sacrifice of man's life'. For Bolivar liberty did not simply mean freedom from the absolutist state of the eighteenth century, as it did for the Enlightenment, but freedom from a colonial power, to be followed by true independence under a liberal constitution. And with liberty he wanted equality – that is, legal equality – for all men, whatever their class, creed or colour. In principle he was a democrat and he believed that governments should be responsible to the people. 'Only the majority is sovereign', he wrote; 'he who takes the place of the people is a tyrant and his power is usurpation'. But Bolivar was not so idealistic as to imagine that South America was ready for pure democracy, or that the law could annul the inequalities imposed by nature and society. He spent his whole political life developing and modifying his principles, seeking the elusive mean between democracy and authority. In Bolivar the realist and idealist dwelt in uneasy rivalry.
