Answer:
Since 1960, under the influence of cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and cognitive neuroscience, our awareness of ourselves and our environment—our consciousness—has reclaimed its place as an important area of research. After initially claiming consciousness as its area of study in the nineteenth century, psychologists had abandoned it in the first half of the twentieth century, turning instead to the study of observable behavior because they believed consciousness was too difficult to study scientifically. A few examples of when someones body goes in auto pilot could be of the following; negative thoughts about yourself that keep popping up, undesirable habits such as nail biting, sitting on social media too often, and always experiencing certain negative feelings.
Answer:
The author of the article does not answer the question explicitly, but presents arguments that allow the reader to construct his own answer and see that dogfighting and football are not so different.
Explanation:
"How different are dogfighting and football?" is the subtitle of the article "Offensive Play" that presents a comparison between the violence of dogfighting and the violence of football games.
According to the article, dogfighting is illegal and somewhat inhuman and malicious, unlike football, these two elements have a lot in common. First of all, both football and dogfighting are extremely violent environments that can harm participants and in an intense and very debilitating way. In dogfighting, the dog's resistance and the ability to continue fighting is evaluated, even if it is seriously injured, since the dog that quits fighting is devalued and seen as inferior. In football, athletes are also judged on the resistance and strength they have, even in the midst of the violent blows they receive, and the player who does not resist is harassed by the crowd and even by teammates.
The author of the article presents these comparisons, stating implicitly that there are not so many differences between dogfighting and the football match, but allowing the reader to draw their own conclusions on the subject.
Answer:
d. not raising her hand when the teacher asks a question.
Explanation:
Social loafing is having the tendency to do less effort while in a group compared to when you're alone.
Not raising your hand when teacher asks a question is such behavior, because you don't want to make it look like you're interested or working.
<u>Answers A and B are the opposite of social loafing,</u> since you would be paying attention and work publicly by assisting others.
<u>Answer C doesn't have a direct relationship with social loafing</u>, but a loafer will usually not sit in front of the class, he's sit in the back, trying to be ignored.
I think it’s C but not a 100% sure... but hopefully you get it right
Answer:
Analytical decision-makers carefully analyze data to come up with a solution. They are careful and adaptable thinkers. They will invest time to glean information to form a conclusion.
Explanation:
