Answer: a. True
It is true that when one uses explanations to convince others that conduct that would be ordinarily be wrong in a given context or situation is acceptable and would became a self-serving for one’s own conduct due to our present culture in the society.
Moreover, some unacceptable conduct became morally acceptable because our concept with what is good or bad has changed due to our environmental influences.
Fred's parents are reinforcing his negative behaviors on a "partial reinforcement schedule".
<h3>What is a partial reinforcement schedule?</h3>
The majority of reinforcement schedules are partial, and they can be either fixed or variable in terms of the number of replies they reward, or they can be interval or ratio-based in terms of the amount of time between responses. The number of answers or the interval between reinforcements is fixed and unchanging under a fixed schedule.
The reaction is only reinforced sometimes in partial or intermittent reinforcement. With fractional support, learned behaviors are acquired more gradually, but the reaction is more resistant to eradication.
Although you initially used a regular calendar, it may not always be practicable to reinforce each and every instance of the behavior. In the end, you can decide to go to a fractional calendar where you only provide help when a lot of reactions occur or when a lot of time has passed.
To know more about the partial reinforcement schedule refer to: brainly.com/question/24848347
#SPJ4
Answer:
Both the lizard and hawk population will decrease.
Answer:
Affirmative action programs for under-represented minorities.
Explanation:
Affirmative action is defied as a policy where the race, color, sex, national origin or religion are considered to increase the opportunities provided to an underrepresented section of the society. It supports members of any disadvantage group or minorities who have discriminated in areas of housing, employment and education.
In the context, The University of California took the affirmative actions against the disadvantaged minorities to provide admission to them despite the Federal court decision in California v. Bakke (1978) to prohibit the use of the quota system to get admission in the university.
From the 1340s to the nineteenth century, barring two brief interims during the 1360s and the 1420s, the lords and rulers of England (and, later, of Great Britain) likewise guaranteed the position of the royalty of France. The case dates from Edward III, who guaranteed the French position of royalty in 1340 as the sororal nephew of the last immediate Capetian, Charles IV. Edward and his beneficiaries battled the Hundred Years' War to implement this case and were quickly fruitful during the 1420s under Henry V and Henry VI, yet the House of Valois, a cadet part of the Capetian tradition, was, at last, successful and held control of France. Regardless of this, English and British rulers proceeded to unmistakably call themselves rulers of France and the French fleur-de-lys were incorporated into the regal arms. This proceeded until 1801, by which time France never again had any ruler, having turned into a republic. The Jacobite petitioners, in any case, did not unequivocally surrender the case.
