Answer:
a. systematic desensitization.
Explanation:
Systematic desensitization: In psychology, the term "systematic desensitization" is described as one of the 'behavioral techniques" that is being generally used by different psychologists to treat phobias, fear, and anxiety disorders.
A psychologist who uses systematic desensitization on his or her clients engages the client in a few relaxation exercises and then eventually expose the client to a distinct "anxiety-provoking stimulus" such as place, object, etc.
Goal: It is considered as one of the therapeutic interventions that help in eliminating anxiety or fearful situations.
In the question above, the given technique is known as systematic desensitization.
Answer:Benjamin Harrison
Explanation:
He was a grandson of the ninth president, William Henry Harrison, and a great-grandson of Benjamin Harrison V, a founding father who signed the United States Declaration of Independence.
I do not believe that this factor is a factor that needs a grant. it is a small factor of maturity, and a momentary factor, there is not a great disparity which is justifiable to have a scholarship for that, in my view it is a minimal difference that is soon matched.
Answer:
Denotative
Explanation:
Denotative is the sign of its meaning preciously to its literal meaning more or less like the dictionaries meaning that try to define the meaning. Denotation is sometimes is the contrast of connotation that includes associated meaning. connotation meanings evoke sensible attitudes towards the phenomena whereas the denotation meaning of the word is perceived by visible concepts. In many ways, it has been used as part of meanings. However part referred to the various situation. It is an example of the first level of analysis. Denotation often refers to something accurate and escape being a metaphor. It is often coupled with the connotation that is the second level of analysis is the denotation representation.
In general terms, most human beings are committed to obeying the law. However, to give a well-founded answer it's important to take into consideration the concepts of <em>ethics </em>and <em>morality</em> and also the cultures involved in this matter. Having said that, in the dilemma of a person being forced to choose between breaking the law to help a friend or not breaking the law but disappointing a friend, the results I would expect are the following:
The Hindu population (adults and children), based on the complex and inherent concept of <em>Dharma, </em>which assigns a high value to right conduct, ethics and morality, would tend to prioritise the obedience to law while the group of Americans would probably hesitate in this forced decision. Some psychology specialists talk about a moral crisis in America in which the limits of moral conviction, virtues and vices, good and evil, right and wrong are not very clear. If this applies to a vast part of American society, they would not be expected to choose law obedience in first place.
