Megan's profane language increases in frequency when it leads to her friend's approving laughter but decreases in frequency when it leads to her parent's criticism. This best illustrates: <u>b. the law of effect</u>.
<u>Explanation</u>:
Profane language is a kind of offensive language which gets bleeped on TV. This kind of language shows lack of respect and portrays the behavior of the person to be bad.
According to <em><u>law of effect</u></em>, the responses determine the occurrence of the situation. The responses with higher effect for the situation may occur again, but if the response produces discomfort effect the chance of occurrence of the situation again will be less.
Megan’s profane language increases in front of his friends and decreases before his parents.
In a Market Economy, where one of its characteristics is the definition and application of the <em>property rights</em>, the situations described in alternatives B and C are likely to occur. Whereas the alternatives A and D are examples of a Command Economy where the means of production are opperated by one organization.
Answer: A. designating an anti-charity should be more effective because loss aversion will provide additional motivation
.
Options:
A. designating an anti-charity should be more effective because loss
aversion will provide additional motivation
B. designating a charity should be more effective because it avoids all potential for loss
C. it shouldn’t matter whether one designates a charity or anti-charity
D. self-interest biases generally keep people from choosing the anti-charity
Explanation:
The study of behavioral Economics shows that people are more driven by the loss of fear than the hope of gain. This is known as loss aversion. In commitment contracts where penalty money is promised to a charity or an anti-charity if the goal is not achieved, those who promise their money to an anti-charity tend to achieve their goals more. The same also applies when comparing this group and those who do not have to forego anything if they do not meet their target.
This is because giving to a charity will still seem beneficial while losing the money to an anti-charity will seem like a total loss.
No because most did not have full power like the wealthy and higher ups. Also Slave men were not allowed to vote
