Answer:
B. The frame is people who play video games
Explanation:
into a survey it its neccesary to delimit people according to the subject of the survey in order to get representative dates of the population, for that reason if the survey want to show the quantity of people who buy video games in a national scale, the frame of that study is people who play video games, in this order of ideas, people who don't play videogames, don't like videogames and don't have the adquisitive power to buy video games would be excluded from the survey, however, if the pollster doesn't take into account the previous affirmations, the survey won't be conclusive, reaslistic and useless for showing the quantity people who buy video games in the game store.
Two cognitive and emotional advances must emerge (in tandem with objective self-awareness) before young children have the capacity for behavior regulation. One of those advances is an emotional response to wrongdoing the other is Representational thought.
<h3>
What is Representational thought?</h3>
By means of. Mental consciousness is based on the use of symbols, such as language, images, and other symbology. When a person thinks about their surroundings using words or images, this is known as representational thought.
(18–24 months) Early Representational Thought Children start to understand the meaning of symbols that symbolize things or events. They describe objects using everyday words, such as "doggie" and "horsey."
In the fourth sensorimotor substage, children start to develop symbols to represent things that happen in the real world. Children at this age start to transition from a primarily physical perspective of the world to one that involves cerebral processes as well.
To know more about Representational thought refer to: brainly.com/question/5655237
#SPJ4
The Hawthorne effect (also referred to as the observer effect) is a type of reactivity in which individuals modify an aspect of their behavior in response to their awareness of being observed.
Answer:
Leaders of the established 1966 military coup, including army officers Colonel E.K. Kotoka, Major A. A. Afrifa, Lieutenant General (retired) J. A. Ankrah, and Police Inspector General J.W.K. Harlley, justified their takeover by charging that the CPP administration was abusive and corrupt. They were equally disturbed by Kwame Nkrumah's aggressive involvement in African politics and by his belief that Ghanaian troops could be sent anywhere in Africa to fight so-called liberation wars, even though they never did so. Above all, they pointed to the absence of democratic practices in the nation—a situation they claimed had affected the morale of the armed forces. According to General Kotoka, the military coup of 1966 was a nationalist one because it liberated the nation from Nkrumah's dictatorship—a declaration that was supported by Alex Quaison Sackey, Nkrumah's former minister of foreign affairs.[1]
Despite the vast political changes that were brought about by the overthrow of Kwame Nkrumah, many problems remained. For example, the underlying ethnic and regional divisions within the society had to be addressed. The apparent spirit of national unity that seemed to have developed during the Nkrumah years turned out to have resulted in part from his coercive powers as well as from his charisma. As a consequence, successive new leaders faced the problem of forging disparate personal, ethnic, and sectional interests into a nation with shared identity and interests. The economic burdens, aggravated by what some[who?] described as past extravagance, crippled each future government's ability to foster the rapid development needed to satisfy even minimal popular demands for a better life. The fear of a resurgence of an overly strong central authority continued to dominate the constitutional agenda and to pervade the thinking of many educated, politically minded Ghanaians. Others, however, felt that a strong government was essential.[1]
A considerable portion of the population had become convinced that effective, honest government was incompatible with competitive political parties. Many Ghanaians remained committed to non-political leadership for the nation, even in the form of military rule. The problems of the Busia administration, the country's first elected government after Nkrumah's fall, illustrated the problems Ghana would continue to face.[1
