subject
Social Studies, 09.08.2019 19:20 bearbri4520

Sean stopped outside his professor’s office to check on the answers to a quiz. when he began to write the answers down, his pen ran out of ink. he repeated the last four answers to himself while he rushed to his dorm room to write them down. this is best explained by the concept of
(a) maintenance rehearsal.
(b) elaborative rehearsal.
(c) whole rehearsal.
(d) partial rehearsal.
(e) chunking

ansver
Answers: 2

Another question on Social Studies

question
Social Studies, 21.06.2019 21:50
Read case #5 - "targeting target" (on pages 77-78 of your textbook), then answer the following questions: do you think it was ethical for authorities to use one of the high-ranking members to trap other gang members? why or why not? how would you approach the target situation? use the internet to research and find the best practices to protect from identity theft.
Answers: 1
question
Social Studies, 22.06.2019 21:40
51: 28which statement about the relationship between enlightenment philosophers and the philosophy of robert filmer istrue?
Answers: 3
question
Social Studies, 23.06.2019 02:30
Write a sentence with valiant and steadfast
Answers: 2
question
Social Studies, 23.06.2019 05:30
Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.
Answers: 2
You know the right answer?
Sean stopped outside his professor’s office to check on the answers to a quiz. when he began to writ...
Questions
question
Geography, 20.09.2020 06:01
question
Mathematics, 20.09.2020 06:01
question
Mathematics, 20.09.2020 06:01
question
English, 20.09.2020 06:01
Questions on the website: 13722363