Answer:
Naturalistic observation, interviews, and case studies
Explanation:
Three of the most common research methods are naturalistic observation, interviews, and case studies. Each one of them brings something different to the table:
- Naturalistic observation refers to studying subjects directly on their environment without any intervention from the researcher. This is a great method because watching people behave in a natural way will be very revealing and more truthful. When subjects know they are being observed, they often change their behaviour. Naturalistic observation thus requires the observer to be as anonymous and invisible as possible.
- An interview is a research method where the subject is asked to answer to some specific questions crafted by the researcher. Interviews allow the researchers have a much closer look at the subject, trying to ascertain the motives behind their behaviour. However, a problem with interviews is that the subjects often time won't respond truthfully, but will adjust their answers to what is expected from them.
- A case study is a method that goes more in depth than the other two, and the researcher tries to learn as much as possible about the subject through a variety of other methods, like observations, interviews, surveys, etc. Case studies are much thorough and deeper investigations, but they can be very time consuming, and require a subject that is willing to facilitate the work of the researcher, which isn't always possible.
<span>This reflect "stereotyping and prejudice".</span>
In social psychology, the term stereotype<span> is any considered thinking regarding particular kinds of
people or certain methods for acting expected to speak for the whole gathering
of those people or practices overall. These convictions could possibly be right
or wrong as well like in this example Abdul’s qualifications are set aside and
a stereotyping has come up about women being treated unfairly in Muslim societies.
</span>
It is 60% because it makes since beacuse with the georgia polulation it is a bunch of rural communties
Answer:
They believed that direct democracy would make government more responsive and accountable.
Explanation:
in a direct democracy, the citizens will have an active role in voting for the type of regulations that shall be passed by the government. (this is what achieved through ballot initiatives, referendums, and recalls)
Progressive politicians believed that direct democracy will give more power to the citizens to influence the future of the country. It will make the government officials become responsive and accountable because the people will more likely to not re-elect them if they do not at according to people's will.
Its most likely D
Sorry is I am wrong even tho I don’t think so
