The answer on this scenario is all of these. Modelling one's work after the other is acceptable yet to replace one's experience with the experience of the writer is not. Also copying directly and failing to use one's own theme are all not acceptable.
Answer:
The answer is A because the parol evidence rule applies to complete and unambiguous written contracts and makes any evidence that would modify or alter the written contract terms inadmissible. This rule applies to any oral agreements made prior to or contemporaneous with the written contract.
Explanation:
The correct answer is "at least one of the three population means is different from another mean". In population anova comparing studies the null hypothesis states that the mean of all of the studied treatment conditions are equal. The alternative hypothesis should be the contrary of which was is stated in the null hypothesis, which is at least one mean is different from the others.