8.66839572267 is the answer to your question
Answer:A-An unknown person claiming to be a maintenance worker who has no tools or equipment and is dressed inappropriately.
Explanation:
For surveillance one should properly adopt the character in order to avoid the doubt of people. Here the person is claiming to be a maintenance worker but he has no tools or equipment and is dressed inappropriately. This can create a feeling of suspicion among the people whom he had interacted in order to get the information about the culprit.
Answer:
it provides more insight.
Explanation:
Based on the information provided within the question these stories might be valuable to Victoria's Career because it provides more insight. This can be said because the Supreme Court mostly handles appeals, therefore it can help Victoria learn how to handle employees who could not solve their problems by themselves. Also the Supreme Court may deal with rulings that interpret employment law, which is incredibly useful for Victoria as a human resource specialist.
I hope this answered your question. If you have any more questions feel free to ask away at Brainly.
Answer:
1. 3 levels
2.manipulated.
3.given below
Explanation:
1. IV has three levels instructed by cartoon, instructed by teacher instructed by the fourth_grader.
2. V is manipulated by providing different learning styles.
<em>3.</em><em> </em>DV is operationalized by measure the no. Of queries answered properly.<em>
</em>
<em />
There is considerable confusion regarding the ethical appropriateness of using incentives in research with human subjects. Previous work on determining whether incentives are unethical considers them as a form of undue influence or coercive offer. We understand the ethical issue of undue influence as an issue, not of coercion, but of corruption of judgment. By doing so we find that, for the most part, the use of incentives to recruit and retain research subjects is innocuous. But there are some instances where it is not. Specifically, incentives become problematic when conjoined with the following factors, singly or in combination with one another: where the subject is in a dependency relationship with the researcher, where the risks are particularly high, where the research is degrading, where the participant will only consent if the incentive is relatively large because the participant's aversion to the study is strong, and where the aversion is a principled one. The factors we have identified and the kinds of judgments they require differ substantially from those considered crucial in most previous discussions of the ethics of employing incentives in research with human subjects.
