The authors reported that individuals with higher levels of physical functioning reported better adherence to treatment recommendations. They cited a correlation of only 0.281, but it was found to be strongly statistically significant (p <.002). However, the textbook states that such a small r represents a weak correlation. What is the explanation of this apparent contradiction

the correct answer to your question is a. 4^4

good luck my friend!

hope this !

maybe if i you could me by giving me brainliest?

! < 3

have a splendid day < 3 : )

simplifying

5(x + -6) = 2(x + 3)

reorder the terms:

5(-6 + x) = 2(x + 3)

(-6 * 5 + x * 5) = 2(x + 3)

(-30 + 5x) = 2(x + 3)

reorder the terms:

-30 + 5x = 2(3 + x)

-30 + 5x = (3 * 2 + x * 2)

-30 + 5x = (6 + 2x)

solving

-30 + 5x = 6 + 2x

solving for variable 'x'.

move all terms containing x to the left, all other terms to the right.

add '-2x' to each side of the equation.

-30 + 5x + -2x = 6 + 2x + -2x

combine like terms: 5x + -2x = 3x

-30 + 3x = 6 + 2x + -2x

combine like terms: 2x + -2x = 0

-30 + 3x = 6 + 0

-30 + 3x = 6

add '30' to each side of the equation.

-30 + 30 + 3x = 6 + 30

combine like terms: -30 + 30 = 0

0 + 3x = 6 + 30

3x = 6 + 30

combine like terms: 6 + 30 = 36

3x = 36

divide each side by '3'.

x = 12

simplifying

x = 12

this should .

yes.. it's proven to be 36.