The type of influence used by the parents of Mikhail here is called operant conditioning. In this set-up, there is the factor of reward and punishment in order for someone to operate in the desired behavior. In this problem, for example, a warm bonding is given when manly activities are done while yelling and scolding is received when wrong things are preferred.
I believe the answer is: <span>Stage 4: The social-order-maintaining orientation
In </span><span>The social-order-maintaining orientation Stage, people would start to make effort to ensure that there is no social chaos happening in socity.
This would carry out by showing respects to authority, encourage others to follow the law, and making others that break them pay for their irresponsibility.</span>
Each level nation/state is legally independent of its own
jurisdiction or sphere.
hope this helped :)
alisa202
Answer:
True
Explanation:
Free-rein leadership: The term "free-rein leadership" is also referred to as "Laissez-Faire", and is described as one of the types of leadership styles whereby leaders are considered hands-off and tends to allow his/her group members to make specific decisions. Significantly, managers set certain objectives & employees are kept free to do whatsoever is appropriate according to them to achieve or accomplish those objectives.
In the question above, Amari is using a free-rein leadership style, therefore, the given statement is "True".
The correct answer is no.
Alisha was under no obligation to help Timmy, <em>there is no such thing like</em> <em>duty to rescue.</em> There is no legal requirement in the United States to help and rescue someone who is in danger. Even in extreme situation, when a person sees a person falling into a river for example, the witness of the situation is no obliged to assist with help.
There are some cases with some important exceptions: if the defendant created the peril he is obliged to come to the plaintiff's aid, if the defendant started to rescue the plaintiff, he must continue to do so, if the defendant is in a special relationship with the plaintiff ( teacher-student, worker-employer), he is under duty to rescue him.
Alisha was under no duty to inform Timmy's parents of the danger facing him <em>but she should have done it nevertheless.</em> She should at least have phoned them if she didn't have the time to stop by. She knew the boy well and she should have cared more. The need to help the boy should have come from her moral guidance and not as a sense of duty to be performed.
