For Erikson, it is necessary to establish a personal identity to resolve the crisis of intimacy vs. isolation.
<h3>What is an intimacy crisis vs. isolation?</h3>
- It is a phase of human development.
- It is false that occurs at 19-40 years of age.
- It is a phase that determines the personal relationships between individuals.
According to Erikson, intimacy vs. isolation is the time when human beings seek interaction with other human beings. This interaction is developed by the desire to be part of a community and to have companions with whom I can establish an intimate interaction. When this type of interaction is not established, human beings tend to isolate themselves and not form groups.
For Erikson, the individual needs to determine their identity before entering intimacy vs. isolation. Because once identity is determined, the individual knows how to select groups of people most compatible with him or herself. Thus, intimacy vs. isolation is overcome with little difficulty and allows individuals to get through this phase with greater comfort.
Learn more about intimacy vs. isolation on the link:
brainly.com/question/25786631
#SPJ1
Answer: experimental group; control group
Explanation:
An experimental group also called a treatment group in which involves a group is being exposed to receive experimental conditions, here the group is exposed to the experimental independent variable to test for reactions and the changes in reaction are being recorded.-----The group of children given special training to handle anger is the experiment group
A control group is a group which is isolated from an experiment in which the group is not exposed to any treatment conditions and reactions are recorded. The control group helps to check validity of the entire experiment conducted------ The group of children that do not receive the special training.
Answer:
D. Nothing
Explanation:
Angela is not guilty here. Te question tells us that she had no knowledge of her friends intentions. Her friend had the intention of robbing a store and even though angela drove the car, she did not know that a gun was concealed somewhere. If she had knowledge of these before hand, she would have been guilty of aiding and abetting a crime. But since she didn't, she is not guilty.
Answer: A, and B.
Explanation:
Brianliest is appreciated :p
