I would honestly have to go with B on this one.
Answer:
the court will most likely do nothing
Explanation:
Based on the information presented in the passage in regards to the situation at hand it can be said that the court will most likely do nothing. This is because the arbitrator (which is a court official) already closed the case, if there was an error in her findings of fact they needed to be presented or disputed during the case, since once the verdict is given it is final.
If you have any more questions feel free to ask away at Brainly.
Answer with Explanation:
Overt and Covert research methods are both used in <em>observing subjects.</em> The main difference relies on the "awareness" of the <em>subjects/participants</em> being studied.
In an overt research method, the subjects are <u>aware</u> that they are participating in the study while in a covert research method, the subjects are <u>unaware.</u>
The advantages of overt research method is that the participants have <em>informed consent.</em> So, whatever happens is not the fault of the researcher. Since the participants are aware, it becomes easier for the researcher to record events in their presence. On the contrary, it brings about some disadvantages. Since the participants know that they are being observed, they may be<em> inclined to change their behavior.</em> This is called the "Hawthorne Effect." This affects the validity of the outcome of the research.
The advantages of the covert research method is its <u>more valid outcome of research.</u> The participants are <em>naturally behaving,</em> which means that it is more valid as a method than the overt. It is also easier to access closed groups because they are unaware you are observing them. However, one disadvantage is the "deception" it needs to tackle as it <em>doesn't ask informed consen</em>t from its subjects. This has always raised ethical concern, especially for people who value their privacy.
So, this explains the answer.
