Answer:
"the pessimists underestimate our decision-making accuracy because of factors such as choosing questions that contradict people's schemas"
Explanation:
Thaler is together with Daniel Khaneman one of the parents of behavioral economics. This branch focuses on explaining and even looking for meaning in our economic behavior. In other words, why we make the decisions we make regarding our money.
In many social sciences, two different points of view about our rationality coexist today: the pessimist, who sees our limitations as systematic errors at the root of our possible irrational behavior; and the optimist, who conceives these limits as ecological advantages. The first point of view, the pessimist, is maintained by Tversky and Kahneman in their research program on heuristics and biases, and is also based on the theory of "little shoves" or nudges, which Thaler and Sunstein propose following that approach of Tversky and Kahneman.
The second, the optimist, has been developed by Gerd Gigerenzer and the Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition (ABC) at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development, and by other evolutionary psychologists such as Leda Cosmides and John Tooby.
The correct answers are: Rejected Children
, Neglected Children
, Average Children
, Popular Children
Explanation:
There are four main types of children which will also accommodate the answer to the given question:
- Rejected Children: are infrequently nominated as someone’s best friend and are actively disliked by their peers.
- Neglected Children: are infrequently nominated as a best friend, but are not disliked by their peers.
- Average Children: receive an average number of both positive and negative nominations from their peers.
- Popular Children: are frequently nominated as a best friend and are rarely disliked by their peers.
Learn more about peer relationships at:
brainly.com/question/9065986
#LearnWithBrainly
I would say C they would need to improve the quality.
Answer:
D. agreeable; extroverted
<em>In online environments we rely on all sorts of cues to form impressions of other people's personalities. For example, someone with an email address that is interpreted as female is likely to be perceived as </em><em>agreeable</em><em>, and someone with a humorous email address is likely to be perceived as </em><em>extroverted</em><em>.</em>
Explanation:
It has been widely proved that we rely on cues to form impressions of others' personalities in online environments. If someone has an email address that is interpreted as female, one could easily perceive that person as delightful, affable, soft, tender or agreeable because those are the concepts associated with femininity. In the same way, if someone has a humorous email address, that person is likely to be perceived as entertaining, demonstrative, amusing, sociable, playfull or extroverted.