<span>The likelihood that an individual will help someone in an emergency situation is "negatively" correlated with the number of other people present.
</span>
Negative correlation refers to a statistical measure used to depict a connection between two factors. At the point when two factors are contrarily associated, one variable reductions as alternate increments, and the other way around. In other words we can say that that both variables are inversely related to each other.
I think it is OU, i typed it all out and it showed “ OU “
Depends on where you’re talking about. For example in Europe, Christopher Columbus was funded money after asking Queen Isabella. He told her about all the he would bring back to the country. So using that information, they would most likely request funding from royalty or people of high social classes.
Answer:
balance
Explanation:
Gordon Bazemore is a professor of Criminal Justice and is an avid speaker on the topic of Restorative Justice. According to my research on Bazemore's studies, I can say that based on the information provided within the question he has suggested that restorative justice should be organized around the principle of balance. In other words it should be a balanced approach that divides efforts equally into crime victims, increase competency in offenders, enhancing community safety.
I hope this answered your question. If you have any more questions feel free to ask away at Brainly.
Answer:
<em>I can see that there are no choices.</em>
fallacy of bandwagon
Explanation:
A "logical fallacy" refers to the error of reasoning or logical gap that makes an argument invalid.
The situation above commits the fallacy of the bandwagon because the argument is being supported only according to a significant number of population. This is a fallacy because it doesn't necessarily mean all of the retired persons are unhappy about the level of Social Security assistance due to the opinion of 30 persons who agreed that they were unhappy. It becomes a "standalone justification" of the validity of an argument. We cannot judge the happiness or unhappiness of all retired persons according only to a group of 30 persons <em>(even though they were chosen from different parts of the country). </em>
So, this explains the answer.
