Answer:
They believed that multiple personality disorder became a very strong element of pop culture which could cause dishonest psychiatrists to issue this diagnosis just to make money.
Explanation:
The diagnosis of multiple personality disorder has become very popular in pop culture, being frequently featured in films and books with a large audience. However, the diagnosis of this disorder is very difficult to make, and often it is not even possible to detect it, however Spanos and other psychiatrists believed that the popularity of this disorder could encourage dishonest psychiatrists to diagnose patients with it, in order to making money through flawed treatments and the need for attention.
A.<span>This case allowed for a broad interpretation of the powers of the federal government.</span>
Answer:
Central (traits).
Explanation:
The central traits, according to the cardinal traits of personality, developed by Gordon Cattell's approach, are the basic building blocks of most people's personality. The major terms you use to describe yourself, or others, are indeed your/their central traits of personality. In this case, our hypotetical cousin's central traits are being warm, happy, optimistic, funny and high achieving. The most general terms you find to describe someone usually are their central traits.
Answer:
They built them on hills.
Explanation:
Of course, they did this to create a natural defense from the attack of foreign invaders. For example, the city of Rome itself was built on seven famous hills. Of course, through time they tried to fortify them as much as possible, but the main defense laid on the physical location of those cities.
Answer:
Case study
Explanation:
A case study is a kind of study used in social sciences in which the researcher observes an individual/group/event in a very in-depth manner. Case studies give a lot of information about the person or group who is being studied and let the researcher make causal inferences (because of the in-depth observation) and the researcher gets a better understanding of the situation.
In this question, the psychologist faces an ethical dilemma of needing to remove a potentially beneficial treatment. However, using a case study, she wouldn't need to do so because she could observe the autistic child in his environment without changing it, because the case study is an observing explanatory study. Therefore, the ethical dilemma would be eliminated and she could draw conclusions from the study.
