The correct answer is <em>B. the study on obedience. </em>The researcher was trying to measure the level of obedience to authority figures opposing personal consciousness. The experiment was done at Yale University.
Thank you for posting your question here. It can be considered to be consistent with the given facts. As you know, an hypothesis, much less a theory, is never proven. It can be shown to be consistent with given observations. As new observations are collected, the given hypothesis may have to be modified.
If the celery became crisp when it was soaked in ice water, then clearly that the water has rehydrated the celery is a reasonable hypothesis. But did it have to be ice cold water? Would room temperature water work? What about boiling water?
And thus most of the time, the success of an hypothesis leads to the design of new experiments to test and expand the original hypothesis.
Lista ahí mismo está en español
Yes Fredric Douglas's account is a trustworthy source for knowing about John Brown's intentions.
<h3>Who was Fredrick Douglas?</h3>
This man was an abolitionist, a speaker and a publisher in the United States.
He led the march to end slavery during the civil war in the country and before it.
His account is trustworthy due to the fact that he had personal relations with John Brown.
Read more on Fredrick Douglas here: brainly.com/question/13896424
To prove frauds, we need to show that <span>The innocent party relied on the wrongdoer's representation.
If the accused in fraud case represent true representation despite the negative effect that experienced by the accuser than the court will rule that the accuser just make a really bad business decision rather than being scammed.</span>
