Primary sources are valuable to historians because they give insight into the ways in which historical figures understood or internalized what they experienced, their place or significance in history, and give historians an understanding of historical figures' opinions.
That kind of fallacy is called Argumentum ad Hominem. It means the argument is addressed to the person; attacking that person instead the issue. There is an irrelevance because the argument is against to the person making a claim, rather against to the claim itself. An example is judging a person's social status or attitude, like calling his strategies aren't effective to finish a certain task because of his untidiness and laziness.
Answer:
Predictive validity.
Explanation:
A Predictive validity test is the test that is taken to predict the future performance of the applicant based on the scores in the test. The test is useful in predicting the future, as suggested by the name.
The tests that are taken before allowing a person in any organisation are often predictive. A pre-employment test is such example.
<u>In the given case, the entrance exams are also an example of predictive validity. It is because based on the scores scored by a student will help the university authorities about the performance of the student</u>.
So, the correct answer is predictive validity.
I believe the answer is: Type A
People with type A personality tend to have the chracteristics that structured for them to compete and dominate other individuals. (this includes <span>hard-driving, competitive, perfectionist, impatient, agressive, etc)
</span>On average, they tend to achieve more in their career but would develop higher stress level.
This could be Character (can also be trait or temperament) <span>
</span>
