Child development specialists have observed that adolescents who receive large weekly allowances tend to spend money on items considered frivolous by their parents whereas adolescents who receive small weekly allowances do not. Thus, in order to ensure that their children do not spend money on frivolous items, parents should not give their children large weekly allowances.

Which of the following pieces of information would be most useful in evaluating the validity of the conclusion above?

(A) The average amount of money received by adolescents who receive large weekly allowances

(B) Any differences among parents in the standard used to judge an item as frivolous

(C) The educational background of the child development specialists who made this observation

(D) The difference between the average annual income of families in which the parents give their children large weekly allowances and that of families in which the parents give their children small weekly allowances

(E) The percentage of adolescents who receive no weekly allowance

Attitudes toward homeless people. negative attitudes toward poor people are negative when a person is homeless? to find out, a common. are attitudes more description of a poor person is read to subjects. there are two versions of this description. one begins jim is a 30-year-old single man he is currently living in a small single-room apartment the other description begins jim is a 30-year-old single man. he is currently homeless and lives in a shelter for homeless people. otherwise, the descriptions are the same. after reading the description, you ask subjects what they believe about jim and what they think should be done to 26 him. the subjects are 544 adults interviewed by telephone. outline the design of this experiment.

Aplaintiff filed a civil action based on negligence against a defendant in federal district court, alleging that the defendant negligently ran a red light at an intersection and collided with the plaintiff's vehicle, causing the plaintiff's injuries. a week after the close of discovery, the plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment on the issue of whether the defendant was negligent. with the motion, the plaintiff filed (i) his own sworn affidavit, which stated that the traffic signal was green as he entered the intersection, (ii) an affidavit of a witness who was driving the car behind him, which stated that the witness saw the entire incident and that the plaintiff's traffic signal was green as he approached and entered the intersection; and (iii) an affidavit of another witness, which stated that she saw the entire incident and that the defendant's signal had been red for several seconds before the defendant entered the intersection and was still red when the defendant entered the intersection. the defendant filed a response to the motion, noting that her answer denied negligence and further denied that her traffic signal was red, and argued that the issue of negligence and the issue of whether her traffic signal was red were in dispute, so those issues should be tried to a jury. how should the court rule on the plaintiff's motion?

Idont know any of these can anyone me