Category: Uncategorized

Bostock VS. Clayton County

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Course Name and Code

Instructor

Date

Bostock VS. Clayton County

This is a case in which the issue at hand is employment and discrimination. Even though in Boston according to Title VII there was no clear means through which a person could be discriminated it turns out that the ruling of the case was very explicit in terms of how employees should be treated and it said that employees should never at any given moment be discriminated based on their sexual orientation. This was because some people discriminated against some others in their working environments based on their sexual orientation and the people who suffered a lot where the LGBTQ community since a lot of people were not comfortable with working with them. Bostock sued Clayton County for discrimination based on sexual orientation.

The major laws involved in the court were majorly the laws of the state and Title VII laws. The laws were not clear and the case was taken to the supreme court for a better interpretation and final verdict about whether it is okay in some instances to discriminate against a person based on their sexual orientation. The supreme court decided that it was unlawful to discriminate against a person based on their sexual orientation and that it was illegal. I agree with the court’s ruling because indeed it is wrong to have a person be discriminated against because they do not follow what most people do or to be discriminated against because they are different than other people. Therefore, the court enabled people to have a uniform place of work whereby there are no people who are better than others.

Reference

Mallory, C., Vasquez, L. A., & Meredith, C. (2020). Legal protections for LGBT people after Bostock v. Clayton County.

Student’s name:

Course:

Professor’s name:

Date:

A Summary of “A History of the World in Six Glasses,” by Tom Standage

A History of the World in six glasses is a historical novel by Tom Standage. The primary purpose of the book is to show the pervasive influence of various drinks on history’s course. The story takes readers on a journey through time, thus indicates the past of human beings through the lens of drinks. The thesis of the novel is that certain specialty beverages have significantly affected people in all aspects of life. In other words, these beverages have changed social views, religious ceremonies, economic facets, people’s diets, religious ceremonies and even political facets. Tom Standage the subject that he has written about and did not offer any information or any analysis that disapproves of the thesis of his novel. Standage has written three other historical books which support his information and also the research that he has provided in his book thus, his background gives the novel authority.

“A History of the World in Six Glasses,” has been divided into six main sections; and each section is for a drink. The first section is beer. This represents the first civilization of man, which was adopted after farming and domestication of cereal grains was adopted. This advancement in lifestyle led to the emergence of scribes, artisans and administrators. The beer had so many advantages to man; it nourished the first civilization of humanity, and the rations and wages of man were paid in beer and bread CITATION Sta02 l 1033 (Standage). The second section is wine. This was the second beverage that played a significant role in flourishing in both the Roman and the Greek cultures. This drink also initiated seaborne trade which spread their literature, politics and philosophy. The novel clearly shows how the above advancements came into being and how they grew in the Greek community. The Romans who also adopted the Greek culture also used wine strongly.

After the period of the middle ages, The Arab scholars led to the awakening of Europe. This was the period of Exploration or the Colonial Period, and the knowledge of distillation led to the discovery of new drinks. The novel clearly explains how some forms of condensed alcohol such as rum and brandy were popular mainly in American colonies. The forth beverage that is presented in the novel is coffee. This beverage became the drink of the intellect and was known to sharpen the mind. The fifth beverage was tea; this drink even became as England’s national drink. Tea imports from countries such as India and China led to the trade. The novel clearly explains the power of companies such as the British East India Company which greatly generated more revenue than the British government and was able to rule over more people. The final drink is Coca-Cola which was initially formulated as a medical drink. Later, the drink became the symbol of America’s consumer capitalism.

In conclusion, “A History of the World in Six Glasses,” makes it clear that man’s history is a history of human consumption. Whether people are pondering revolution in Paris or Boston, throwing tea leaves, all the above drinks have had impacts on who people are today. Tom Standage was quite successful in proving his thesis throughout his novel. As the thesis was clearly stated in the introduction it has been clearly supported in every chapter in the epilogue.

Works cited

BIBLIOGRAPHY l 1033 Standage, Tom. “A History of the World in six glasses.” (2002). 14 September 2018.

A Summary on Stimulus Checks

By definition, a stimulus check is a check or some amount of money sent by the U.S government to its taxpayers to stimulate the economy by providing consumers with some money to spend on their daily basis. The reasoning under this project is to provide relief economic hardships. The stimulus checks are sent via email or through direct deposits to the individuals who qualify for the checks in an onetime occurrence. Stimulus payments also vary depending on the capacity and the responsibilities one has and also depending on the amount of salary an individual earns. The current issues like the COVID-19 pandemic have raised alarm on the U.S government and the other nations worldwide are going to distribute the funds and maintain an economically stable country.

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a lot of threats to the U.S government since the viral infection ranges from mild to severe illness and it is also highly contagious. Safety measures have been put in place in controlling the spread of this deadly disease. These control measures include proper hygiene, social distancing, and covering of nose mouth. A lot of business which had been operating normally have been closed down leaving only the essential businesses to operate. Despite the essential businesses being allowed to operate, there have also been strict regulations on the hours of operation and strict regular cleaning and sanitization. The essential businesses which are high on demand during this pandemic include medical stores, groceries, and banks. The non-essential businesses were therefore closed down and required to work from home to avoid the overcrowding in the towns and cities to avoid further spread of the disease. Some non- essential businesses like the grooming and tourism industries have been critically affected since they heavily depend on physical interaction and therefore the aspect of working from home does not apply to them.

The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly impacted the U.S economy and this has led to quantitative easing. Quantitative easing is therefore an unconventional monetary policy whereby the central bank purchases long-term securities to capital supply and encourage money lending and investments. The aspect of quantitative easing is similar to that of stimulus checks since they both focus on increasing cash flow to boost the economy. The advantage of stimulus checks is that it helps in maintaining cash flow in the economy and therefore boosting not only small and pressed businesses but also large scale businesses. The negative impacts of stimulus checks include; lack of enough funding, debt collectors seizing checks, and errors in sending the payments among many other negative impacts. It is therefore important to put more efforts into placing policies and strict prevention measures to control further spread of coronavirus so as the economy moves forward.

Name

Course

Tutor

Date

Major branches of Judaism Today

Judaism religion is based on Abrahamic faith, with its origin being the Middle East. The religion was founded by Moses, though the believers trace their belief to Abraham time. The religion currently has over 13 million believers, most of them being in Israel, Germany and United States. The religion is founder on firm belief in one God, with whom Abraham entered a covenant on their behalf, and worshiped in synagogues.

Judaism has several branches today. The Orthodox Judaists believe that Moses was given both written and oral laws at Mount Sinai. The Torah is believed to contain 613 commandments. The believers observe the Jewish laws, but some integrate them with modernity. Some faithful’s however are too strict in their faith, dress uniquely and live in seclusion. The conservative Judaists argue that the Torah was directly transmitted to man via God (The Jewish Outreach Institute, 1). The Torah thus has human elements. While these laws should be adaptive, the true values of Judaism should not change. The Reform Judaism is based on the belief that the writing of the Torah was done by different people before being combined. As such, the Jewish Laws are not binding. The group however observes some Jewish values and ethics. The Reconstructionist Judaism is based on the argument that Judaism is a religion of civilization that is ever evolving. As such, there should be no personalization of the deity. The Torah is thus observed not because it is God given but because of its rich cultural teachings. Lastly, there is the Humanistic Judaism. This branch was founded by Rabbi Sherwin Wine in Michigan in 1960s. It is based on contemporary human life ((The Jewish Outreach Institute, 1). Religion is viewed as a way of life that is devoid of some supernatural authority. Religion should help man to achieve dignity, self-esteem and humanistic values.

Work Cited

The Jewish Outreach Institute. Different denominations (types) of Judaism. Web. <http://www.joi.org/qa/denom.shtml >

Major Components Of The Current State Of An Enterprise Information System Architecture

Course Project—EISA:

The EISA diagram is very important in analyzing the business process in the company some of the main contribution it has made to the company include the ability of the organization to analyze the production trends in the company and develop a proactive measures of dealing with the problems. It is also important in determining the optimal process and procedures that the organization can follow to leverage its competitive advantages and realize its productivity. The organization also relies on the EISA diagram to map the pathway to sustainability, profitability and optimality.

However, the current EISA has a number of limitation on the general productivity and efficiency and profitability because of the inherent weaknesses and limitation it has on the marketing processes.

Reporting structure:

The company is reporting structure is marked by numerous levels that hinder immediate execution of financial plans. The financial planning and execution structure of the company is laborious and bureaucratic, making the release of funds and execution m of the planned marketing activities in the company very slow. This interferes with the timelines and the bottom lines of its activities.

Marketing gap

The pillar of the organization in question is operational excellence, however this has been so hard to meet considering the fact the process model in use is not optimized for excellence. Some of the factors that contribute to this limitation include the decision making model used within the company and the performance evaluation system. The company in the service sectors is experiencing problems with the decision structure. The company is mostly composed of poor decision structure in which the upper echelon personnel (C-level) who are not in touch with the line managers and middle level members only make the decision. In all organization, the middle level Managers are the only people with facts on the marketing system within the organization and are always in constant contact with the customer. All the queries and customer complaints pas through them and they are the people who operationalise4 the plans developed within the company. Therefore main decision team should be integrated with the midlevel managers and customer focused team to ensure that the decision made within the company take into consideration the input of the low cadre managers. Additional the company needs to leverage its business synergy to fit the strategic fit that will enable it to achieve the objective of operational excellence.

Operational excellence.

The main advantage that the middle offers is operational excellence as the company process o determining and assembling the right input (resources) and converting them to the output that that the customers want, makes it’s the most optimal process in the industry. The production process is very efficient with minimal resource wastes and time lags despite the slow decision process. Once the company has made decision, the execution process is often very fast.

Reduction of cost of IT, and the general complexity

The current enterprise information system architecture is vary useful in reducing the general, complexity within the organization, it details the reporting structure and the way the cost of information technology in the organization can be reduced thereby contributing to the final cost reduction strategy by the company. It also provides newer ways for re-purpose in addition to re-use as it helps the organization to link its process to the new technologies and skill. While this is true, has one weakness as it relies so much on IT. However, this is overridden by the fact that the architecture is closely connected to the business need and strategies. The main challenge may lie on the extension of the integration to all the aspects of the organization and its process across all the complex and multi-partner enterprise

Methods in Research

Student’s Name

Institution Affiliation

Course Name and Code

Professor’s Name

Date

Methods in Research

Question 1

The term operationalization refers to the process of defining a factor or a concept into a measurable variable. Usually, operationalizing is crucial to a research study because it assists in the creation of research methodology. Once variables are operationalized in the study, the researcher can easily examine the relationship between them and define whether and how variation in one of the variables of interest may result in variation in the other.

A variable refers to something that has the potential to have more than one value or meaning, such as a number. For instance, age can be expressed in different years or months. There are two main different types of variables: independent and dependent variables. The most important difference between these two variables is that an independent variable’s value or presence defines the value of other variables, while the dependent variable’s values are determined by an independent variable’s value or presence. In a study examining the impact of virtual learning on student academic performance during the COVID-19 pandemic, the independent variable is virtual learning, while the dependent variable is academic performance. In this example, a student’s academic performance is determined by the adoption of virtual learning.

Question 2

Subjects, also referred to as participants or samples, are the individuals who participate in the study. To select a sample for a study, sampling is performed. Sampling is the procedure of selecting who to take part in the study and is determined by the nature of the research questions and variables in the study. The sampling frame or population is a group of people from whom the researcher selects their study sample. Sampling may take two forms, probability/random sampling and non-probability/purposeful sampling. The main difference between non-probability and probability sampling is that probability sampling gives all subjects in the sampling frame an equal chance of being selected to participate in the study since participants are chosen at random and without researcher bias. On the contrary, in non-probability sampling, all subjects in a sampling frame do not have equal chances of being selected to participate in the study, which is associated with researcher bias. Probability sampling is considered to be more scientifically valid compared to non-probability sampling. An example of random sampling is whereby if the researcher wants to choose ten people out of 100, the researcher will select the 10th person in every group of 10. On the other hand, an example of non-probability sampling is where a researcher chooses only individuals who engage in physical exercises, such as people who go to the gym, when examining the impact of physical exercise on mental health.

Question 3

My currently proposed research question examines how narcissism contributes to antisocial behavior in men. This proposed research question looks at the relationship between narcissism and antisocial behaviors among men. It also has both dependent and independent variables. In this research question, the independent variable is narcissism, while the dependent variable is antisocial behavior.

Question 4

In my currently proposed research question, which examines how narcissism contributes to antisocial behavior in men, I think the subject is to collect data from would-be male students in a US-based university who are above the age of 18 years. The sample frame that I might use to select to solicit these subjects from would be public universities in the US. I believe it will be more realistic to conduct a non-probability sampling for my proposed study because public universities have more male and female students, as well as male students below the age of 18 who would have wanted to participate in this study. Thus, using non-probability sampling will eliminate the chances of selecting these subjects.

Metropolitan Museum Assignment

Name

Institution

Introduction

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, popularly known as the MET, is a large museum that swarms with people and is filled with exquisite-looking works of art that look like nothing anyone has seen before. There are enormous paintings, ornaments and jewelry, and life-size sculptures placed in strategic places for the sight and pleasure of all museum visitors. It was my first time in the museum, and I was keen on finding art about modern history. Such art in the Met dates from early 1900 to the present. I found four such works of art.

Chance Encounter at 3 A.M. by Red Grooms

The oil on canvas painting by Red Grooms caught my eye instantly because it appeared like a comical cartoon cut-out from a newspaper or magazine. Upon close inspection, I realized there was much more detail to it. Two men were sitting on a bench by a railed park, and another was walking by in front of them with his dog. Close to them stands the statue of an Italian war hero, only known as ‘Garibaldi.’ Rounded cars are winding around a corner further in the background, meaning that perhaps the painting was set in the 1960s. The art also features the words of George Washington on an arch overlooking a block of buildings. The painting is set in early in the evening.

Red Grooms made the painting in 1984. I imagine that it relates to the theme of historical leadership and artistic pursuits of the modern art movement. Looking hard at the faces of the seated men, I noticed the faces belonged to Mark Rothko and Willem de Kooning, who were both famous artists of the modern era. The painting draws an observer to reflect on the opportunities and prospects for contemporary political leadership based on the political climate in the Ronald Reagan era.

The Banks of the Bièvre near Bicêtre by Henri Rousseau (circa. 1908-09)

The first thing I thought looking at the painting was what calming effect it had on my mind. The painting was available in Gallery 911 at The Met Fifth Avenue. It depicted a neighborhood covered with tall trees and lush vegetation, and people walking on a pathway. The oil on canvas painting was created by Henri Rousseau (Hoving, T. 1994) in 1909. The landscape also shows a river that flows between two trees past the gated neighborhood.

The unique painting tells a story about social classes (high and low society) and the pollution of the environment in Rousseau’s time (1844- 1910). I noticed that a woman walking on the path was dressed like a maid, and she was holding a basket. The river also appeared to have dark water. These two observations were in sharp contrast to everything else in the painting, which seemed to be magnificent. In my opinion, Henri Rousseau was trying to show the beautiful side of a middle-class community in Paris without ignoring their interaction with their immediate surroundings.

The Street Pavers by Umberto Boccioni (1914)

Umberto Boccioni was among the first Italian pioneers of the Modern Art movement. His oil on canvas painting, which sits in Gallery 830 of the Met Fifth Avenue, appears to be brushes and strokes of many colors and particular shapes. The painting shows men chipping off with their tools on the street. It is clear from the use of sharp rectangles and linear forms in the art that the men were performing a hard task. They appeared to be fully bent over, and all their tools were on the ground, perhaps in forceful contact.

The 1914 painting, to me, depicts the life and plight of Italian laborers in the early twentieth century. I imagine the use of bright colors like blue and orange is meant to celebrate the modern laborer. The theme of urban development is evident in the painting, considering the street pavers’ faces are blurred to blend in with the street setting they are working on. I thought it was interesting that such a painting made in 1914 looked like it had been imagined when the Labor Movement of the United States was declining in 1920.

Dancer Putting on Her Stocking (Third State)

The last piece I observed was the first 1920 bronze cast of Edgar Degas’ sculpture. The wax sculpture is of a young girl pulling up the right stocking with the leg raised. The sculpture is a symbol of sports and the contemporary urban lifestyle. Dances and theatre performance is a significant feature in French history and culture and a valid form of recreation.

Conclusion

My visit to the MET was an exciting and insightful experience. I learned that so much had happened in past civilizations to put us where we are. The modern paintings and sculptures told stories urban and rural life, politics and leadership, and other activities that were relevant in the 20-21st century.

References

Hoving, T. (1994). Making the mummies dance: Inside the Metropolitan Museum of Art. simon and schuster.

Howe, W. E. (1913). A History of the Metropolitan Museum of Art: With a Chapter on the Early Institutions of Art in New York (Vol. 1). Printed at the Gilliss Press.

Villaespesa, E. (2019). Museum collections and online users: development of a segmentation model for the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Visitor Studies, 22(2), 233-252.

Conformity Study

Student Name

Institution affiliation

MethodsParticipants

           For the study, 140 participants among them Florida University students who were not taking the psychology class either in the Fall 2019 or the Spring 2020 were randomly selected. Of the 140 participants, 51.4% (n=72) were male and 48.6% (n=68) were female. Ages of the participants ranged from 18 years to 29 years with an average of 22.16 years (SD=3). The sample population consisted of 45.7% Hispanic (n=64), 25.7% Caucasians (n=36), 20.7%African-Americans (n=29), 5.7%Asian –American (n=8) and 2.1%Native Indians (n=3). (See Appendix 1.)

Materials and Procedures

The participants were informed of the study itself, the risks and benefits that it carried for the students, an overview of the information required and the time required as stipulated in the standardized guidelines for informed consent. The participants had to give their consent verbally after which they were given one of the three research study documents that contained both the primary independent and dependent variables for the study. The document also consisted of five parts, the first part had the Abigail Foster Facebook post, unfortunately the professor while handling the question paper to Abigail he also gave her the answer key and Abigail who was certain she was going to work in spite of working hard used the answers. After she did very well the professor who was to curve the results because most students had not done well changed his mind, the dilemma was with Abigail who was not sure what she should do hence, in search for advice she posted on Facebook. Among the three documents in spite of them having the same scenario the condition under each of them is different, the conditions are; support, oppose and mixed which are various reactions to Abigail’s post.

For the support condition, it outlined eight comments by people who believed that Abigail had done nothing wrong and should accept the grade while putting the blame on the professor who could have been more careful. The second condition oppose, also has eight comments from students who believed that Abigail should admit to her wrongdoing by putting herself in the other students’ shoes. Lastly, the mixed condition has no consensus since among the eight responses some people opposed her actions while others gave her support. 

           After having read the scenario the participants were then required to proceed with part two of the questionnaire where they were required to rate Abigail’s behavior based on some statements by either agreeing or disagreeing. They were to use an interval scale of 1(strongly disagree) to 6(strongly agree). The statements that participants were to evaluate on Abigail’s behavior included, Abigail’s behavior was wrong, Abigail’s behavior was understandable, Abigail’s behavior was reasonable, Abigail’s behavior was unethical, Abigail’s behavior was immoral, Abigail’s behavior was appropriate, and Abigail’s behavior was unacceptable. (See Appendix 2) 

In the third part the participant was to rate various statements on what advice they would offer Abigail, their response if they were in the same situation and their general Abigail’s impression. In regards to the advice, there were three statements, I would advise Abigail to keep silent, I would try to comfort Abigail and I would give Abigail the same advice that her friends gave her. For the other two parts of the sections on the response and impressions the participants have in regards to Abigail’s behavior and their own, the interval scale of 1 (strongly disagree) or 6 (strongly agree) was used. In response to what they would do the participant was given two statements on whether they would confess or keep silent and on Abigail’s impressions it was either she seems warm, moral, sincere, competent, confident, competitive or good-natured. Additionally, the fourth part of the questions contained demographic questions that the participant had the choice of not answering if he or she deemed them private. The questions included gender, age, race, relationship status, whether they were FIU students and whether English was their first language. Lastly, in the fifth part the participant was supposed to give their feedback on whether the advice Abigail was given was either in support of her behavior, opposing it or was more of the both of them, they filled their response by marking an X.

           While the study has both dependent and independent variables, our focus was on the dependent variables which are warm-cold scale, either accepting or rejecting what she did and the self-ratings. The main variable was accepting or rejecting that was reliant on the responses the people wrote in relation to her post and the influence they would have on her. We hypothesized that the participants who read the support response were most likely to support her in that she should keep it to herself and take the win, for those who read the opposing comments were most likely to find her guilty and condemn her actions.

Results

           Under the survey conditions (support vs. oppose vs. mixed) which were our independent variables and while focusing on the participant’s assessment on Abigail’s behavior based on the responses in their scenarios, we arrived as various results. Those who had the suppose response were 46 which was 32.9%, oppose 45 which was 32.1% and mixed were 49 which was 35%. Just like predicted the participant who had the support responses described Abigail competent, moral, confident, warm and good-natured person. They believed that she deserved her grade hence she did not have to report it to the professor, they also termed her response after she was given the answer key to be appropriate and reasonable hence if there was a person to blame it would have to be the professor. However, those who read the opposing notions on the scenarios termed what Abigail had done to be wrong and that she should have reported, they went ahead to describe her as immoral and unacceptable and unethical of what she had done. They also referred her behavior in a not good way disagreeing with all notions in part three of the question. Those who had missed reactions assessment on Abigail tended to balance with a few agreeing while the others disagreed.

           In addition, for the ANOVA test which was our main analysis there was a significant difference in whether our dependent variable on accepting or rejecting Abigail’s behavior had been wrong in relation to the support, oppose and mixed independent valuables, F (2,137) = 4.537, p= .021. The test confirmed that the participant’s assessment would be affected by the response scenario they read. Lastly, the Post Hoc Tests analysis is used to show a significant difference among various groups. From the table, it is evident that there is a statistically significant difference between the reactions by those people who had both suppose and oppose response and those with suppose and mixed response which is (p=0.021) and (p=0.035) respectively while there was no difference with those with oppose and mixed response(p=0.969). Also, this test supported the hypothesis that participants were likely to support Abigail in the support condition (M = 4.2, SD = 0.773), the oppose condition was (M = 3.4 SD = 0.986, and the mixed condition (M = 3.816 SD = 0.727). (See Appendix 3)

Discussion

           As earlier predicted that depending on the response the participants read they would influence their view and eventually on how they would make inferences on Abigail have been proved. Participants who read the positive response were in support of Abigail’s actions and termed her behavior as appropriate, these same people too while asked of what they would have done they supported that they would keep quiet. Similarly, those participants who read the opposing responses arrived at the conclusion that Abigail did the wrong thing and that for the sake of her integrity she should have reported the matter. Lastly, there was no major difference in those who got both responses since just as predicted some opposed while others supported Abigail’s decision. However, it is clear that the difference in all those scenarios assessment by the participants was not major this could have been the fact that the participants all have an experience of how some classes can be tough and in the event, they find themselves in such a situation they are bound to make the same decision. Frankly, if the same situations were to happen to those people who opposed Abigail’s decision they are likely to just act the same way because until one faced a similar issue can their real intentions be revealed.

Appendix 1

Gender (1 = M, 2 = F)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Male 72 51.4 51.4 51.4

Female 68 48.6 48.6 100.0

Total 140 100.0 100.0 Race

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Caucasian 36 25.7 25.7 25.7

Hispanic 64 45.7 45.7 71.4

Native Indian 3 2.1 2.1 73.6

African American 29 20.7 20.7 94.3

Asian American 8 5.7 5.7 100.0

Total 140 100.0 100.0 Age

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 17.00 2 1.4 1.4 1.4

18.00 22 15.7 15.7 17.1

19.00 7 5.0 5.0 22.1

20.00 6 4.3 4.3 26.4

21.00 28 20.0 20.0 46.4

22.00 13 9.3 9.3 55.7

23.00 21 15.0 15.0 70.7

24.00 3 2.1 2.1 72.9

25.00 21 15.0 15.0 87.9

26.00 2 1.4 1.4 89.3

27.00 10 7.1 7.1 96.4

28.00 1 .7 .7 97.1

29.00 4 2.9 2.9 100.0

Total 140 100.0 100.0 Frequency Table

Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Support 46 32.9 32.9 32.9

Oppose 45 32.1 32.1 65.0

Mixed 49 35.0 35.0 100.0

Total 140 100.0 100.0 Appendix 2

Crosstab and Chi Square

Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part II: Abigail’s behavior was wrong

Crosstab

Count

Part II: Abigail’s behavior was wrong Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 3 28 14 1 46

Oppose 7 6 23 9 45

Mixed 4 16 19 10 49

Total 14 50 56 20 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 26.198a 6 .000

Likelihood Ratio 29.031 6 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association 5.884 1 .015

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part II: Abigail’s behavior was understandable

Crosstab

Count

Part II: Abigail’s behavior was understandable Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 1 6 19 20 46

Oppose 9 16 13 7 45

Mixed 1 15 25 8 49

Total 11 37 57 35 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 29.497a 6 .000

Likelihood Ratio 28.563 6 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association 5.492 1 .019

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part II: Abigail’s behavior was reasonable

Crosstab

Count

Part II: Abigail’s behavior was reasonable Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 3 8 20 15 46

Oppose 10 14 14 7 45

Mixed 1 15 25 8 49

Total 14 37 59 30 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 18.740a 6 .005

Likelihood Ratio 18.576 6 .005

Linear-by-Linear Association 1.097 1 .295

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part II: Abigail’s behavior was unethical

Crosstab

Count

Part II: Abigail’s behavior was unethical Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 5 22 15 4 46

Oppose 3 10 21 11 45

Mixed 2 17 22 8 49

Total 10 49 58 23 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 10.553a 6 .103

Likelihood Ratio 10.811 6 .094

Linear-by-Linear Association 3.862 1 .049

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part II: Abigail’s behavior was immoral

Crosstab

Count

Part II: Abigail’s behavior was immoral Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 3 20 19 4 46

Oppose 3 10 23 9 45

Mixed 2 12 27 8 49

Total 8 42 69 21 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 7.529a 6 .275

Likelihood Ratio 7.498 6 .277

Linear-by-Linear Association 3.760 1 .053

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part II: Abigail’s behavior was appropriate

Crosstab

Count

Part II: Abigail’s behavior was appropriate Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 4 17 14 11 46

Oppose 8 17 13 7 45

Mixed 9 21 15 4 49

Total 21 55 42 22 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 5.843a 6 .441

Likelihood Ratio 6.131 6 .409

Linear-by-Linear Association 4.557 1 .033

N of Valid Cases 140 Crosstab

Count

Part II: Abigail’s behavior was unacceptable Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 8 23 13 2 46

Oppose 7 15 16 7 45

Mixed 6 19 19 5 49

Total 21 57 48 14 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 5.711a 6 .456

Likelihood Ratio 5.908 6 .434

Linear-by-Linear Association 2.328 1 .127

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part III: I would advise Abigail to keep quiet

Crosstab

Count

Part III: I would advise Abigail to keep quiet Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 5 6 19 16 46

Oppose 3 22 15 5 45

Mixed 2 17 24 6 49

Total 10 45 58 27 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 20.731a 6 .002

Likelihood Ratio 21.079 6 .002

Linear-by-Linear Association 2.898 1 .089

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part III: I would try to comfort Abigail

Crosstab

Count

Part III: I would try to comfort Abigail Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 0 7 23 16 46

Oppose 2 13 20 10 45

Mixed 0 8 26 15 49

Total 2 28 69 41 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 8.488a 6 .204

Likelihood Ratio 8.705 6 .191

Linear-by-Linear Association .092 1 .761

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part III: I would give Abigail the same advice that her friends gave her

Crosstab

Count

Part III: I would give Abigail the same advice that her friends gave her

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 2 4 24 16

Oppose 3 5 20 17

Mixed 1 10 27 11

Total 6 19 71 44

Crosstab

Count

Total

Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 46

Oppose 45

Mixed 49

Total 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 6.419a 6 .378

Likelihood Ratio 6.485 6 .371

Linear-by-Linear Association 1.469 1 .225

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part III: If I received the answers, I would keep silent

Crosstab

Count

Part III: If I received the answers, I would keep silent Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 11 4 14 17 46

Oppose 18 9 14 4 45

Mixed 14 3 17 15 49

Total 43 16 45 36 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 14.258a 6 .027

Likelihood Ratio 15.338 6 .018

Linear-by-Linear Association .237 1 .627

N of Valid Cases 140 Crosstab

Count

Part III: If I received the answers, I would confess Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 21 10 8 7 46

Oppose 11 10 6 18 45

Mixed 22 9 5 13 49

Total 54 29 19 38 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 9.701a 6 .138

Likelihood Ratio 10.103 6 .120

Linear-by-Linear Association .349 1 .555

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part III: Abigail seems warm

Crosstab

Count

Part III: Abigail seems warm Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 3 5 21 17 46

Oppose 9 7 10 19 45

Mixed 6 3 20 20 49

Total 18 15 51 56 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 9.182a 6 .164

Likelihood Ratio 9.616 6 .142

Linear-by-Linear Association .013 1 .911

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part III: Abigail seems good-natured

Crosstab

Count

Part III: Abigail seems good-natured Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 0 6 24 16 46

Oppose 6 10 12 17 45

Mixed 1 6 23 19 49

Total 7 22 59 52 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 15.237a 6 .018

Likelihood Ratio 16.012 6 .014

Linear-by-Linear Association .006 1 .937

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part III: Abigail seems confident

Crosstab

Count

Part III: Abigail seems confident Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 22 9 9 6 46

Oppose 28 10 4 3 45

Mixed 32 9 4 4 49

Total 82 28 17 13 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 5.786a 6 .448

Likelihood Ratio 5.586 6 .471

Linear-by-Linear Association 3.447 1 .063

N of Valid Cases 140 Crosstab

Count

Part III: Abigail seems competitive Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 5 4 19 18 46

Oppose 12 4 13 16 45

Mixed 4 3 22 20 49

Total 21 11 54 54 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 8.288a 6 .218

Likelihood Ratio 7.966 6 .241

Linear-by-Linear Association .244 1 .622

N of Valid Cases 140 Crosstab

Count

Part III: Abigail seems sincere Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 0 0 15 31 46

Oppose 1 2 11 31 45

Mixed 7 5 13 24 49

Total 8 7 39 86 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 17.373a 6 .008

Likelihood Ratio 20.162 6 .003

Linear-by-Linear Association 11.332 1 .001

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part III: Abigail seems moral

Crosstab

Count

Part III: Abigail seems moral Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 10 7 14 15 46

Oppose 25 12 8 0 45

Mixed 24 8 14 3 49

Total 59 27 36 18 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 32.026a 6 .000

Likelihood Ratio 34.821 6 .000

Linear-by-Linear Association 12.940 1 .000

N of Valid Cases 140 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Part III: Abigail seems competent

Crosstab

Count

Part III: Abigail seems competent Total

2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Support 24 9 7 6 46

Oppose 29 8 6 2 45

Mixed 32 10 4 3 49

Total 85 27 17 11 140

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 4.392a 6 .624

Likelihood Ratio 4.347 6 .630

Linear-by-Linear Association 2.869 1 .090

N of Valid Cases 140 Appendix 3

Descriptive

Part II: Abigail’s behavior was wrong

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Lower Bound Upper Bound

Support 46 3.2826 .62050 .09149 3.0983 3.4669

Oppose 45 3.7556 .95716 .14269 3.4680 4.0431

Mixed 49 3.7143 .88976 .12711 3.4587 3.9699

Total 140 3.5857 .85651 .07239 3.4426 3.7288

Descriptive

Part II: Abigail’s behavior was wrong

Minimum Maximum

Support 2.00 5.00

Oppose 2.00 5.00

Mixed 2.00 5.00

Total 2.00 5.00

ANOVA

Part II: Abigail’s behavior was wrong

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 6.334 2 3.167 4.537 .012

Within Groups 95.637 137 .698 Total 101.971 139 Post Hoc Tests

Multiple Comparisons

Dependent Variable: Part II: Abigail’s behavior was wrong

Tukey HSD

(I) Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) (J) Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig.

Support Oppose -.47295* .17518 .021

Mixed -.43168* .17153 .035

Oppose Support .47295* .17518 .021

Mixed .04127 .17251 .969

Mixed Support .43168* .17153 .035

Oppose -.04127 .17251 .969

Multiple Comparisons

Dependent Variable: Part II: Abigail’s behavior was wrong

Tukey HSD

(I) Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) (J) Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) 95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound

Support Oppose -.8880 -.0579

Mixed -.8381 -.0252

Oppose Support .0579 .8880

Mixed -.3675 .4500

Mixed Support .0252 .8381

Oppose -.4500 .3675

Descriptive

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Minimum Maximum

Lower Bound Upper Bound Part II: Abigail’s behavior was understandable Support 46 4.2609 .77272 .11393 4.0314 4.4903 2.00 5.00

Oppose 45 3.4000 .98627 .14702 3.1037 3.6963 2.00 5.00

Mixed 49 3.8163 .72668 .10381 3.6076 4.0251 2.00 5.00

Total 140 3.8286 .89718 .07583 3.6787 3.9785 2.00 5.00

Post Hoc Tests

Multiple Comparisons

Dependent Variable: Part II: Abigail’s behavior was wrong

Tukey HSD

(I) Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) (J) Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig.

Support Oppose -.47295* .17518 .021

Mixed -.43168* .17153 .035

Oppose Support .47295* .17518 .021

Mixed .04127 .17251 .969

Mixed Support .43168* .17153 .035

Oppose -.04127 .17251 .969

Multiple Comparisons

Dependent Variable: Part II: Abigail’s behavior was wrong

Tukey HSD

(I) Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) (J) Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) 95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper Bound

Support Oppose -.8880 -.0579

Mixed -.8381 -.0252

Oppose Support .0579 .8880

Mixed -.3675 .4500

Mixed Support .0252 .8381

Oppose -.4500 .3675

Tukey HSDa,b

Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) N Subset for alpha = 0.05

1 2 3

Oppose 45 3.4000 Mixed 49 3.8163 Support 46 4.2609

Sig. 1.000 1.000 1.000

Student’s Name

Professor

Institution

Course

Date

Major cause of Cold War

The cold war occurred because of three major reasons. There were differences in global ideologies, political structures and geopolitics, and the acceptable economic arrangements. Ideologically, the West and East fought over superiority, governance and progress the struggle centred on the concept of ‘superpower’. The struggle between the European countries and the Eastern bloc over the control of the world was a major cause of the cold war. The Europeans countries believed that they were progressive countries with better governance and could not be controlled by the Russians and Japanese. The blocs used the political, religious, economic, cultural powers and sometimes force to continue the antagonism. Throughout the period, the world underwent major changes. The English laws became accepted, and property ownership laws passed. The French had the Nobles who attempted to assert their power and control the state. The era also saw rapid changes in transportation, population growth and modern agriculture. The European powers such as Germany, Britain and France lost their global dominance. There was also growing nationalism and national conscience that led to show-of-might and pride in sports such as the Munich Olympics.

These divergent views were pushed by the USA under Roosevelt and the Soviet Union under Stalin. The superpowers clashed over politics of Eastern Europe such as the situation in Poland and the Korean Wars. On the geopolitics front, the actions to be taken against Germany and the country’s future dominate the conflicts.

The Russo-America hatred acted as the major cause of Cold War. The struggle emanated from differences over what action to take against Germany for causing World War. The antagonism occurred differences occurred over disagreements on the system of government for German and how to handle the reparations from Germany’s production. The United States antagonistic attitude toward the Soviet caused tension. While the soviet pushed for the Eastern Europe bloc, the US pushed for the creation of the United Nations.

Cold War occurred because of the economic struggles. The bourgeois elites of Western Europe hold the conventional wisdom after the World War II and this assisted in sustaining parliamentary leadership as well as preserving the essence of market-oriented economies. These two world wars resulted in democracy in Britain that broadened economic transformation in France. Different forces did not possess the mandatory economic skills and reasonable vision for reinstating the shattered economies nationally to productivity. The managerial talent was monopolized by the Christian Democratic parties who turned out as catch-all groupings that involved everybody in the political class such as the old elites. Besides, revolution was rejected by majority of people and peasants well as workers who given the choice to adhere to the benefits of bourgeois society instead of destroying it. The moderate Left from the Communist leadership felt alienated by the threat of Soviet imperialism. The situationcontributed to a mixture of humanitarian, security and commercial motives in United States, and underwriting of European construction during the crucial time.

Bibliography

Alfred von Tirpitz and Bernhard von Bülow. 1st and 2nd Moroccan crises: origins of

world war 1

Charles S. Maier. “The Two Post-war Eras and the Conditions for Stability in Twentieth-

Century Western Europe,” The American Historical Review, 86. 2 (1981): 327-352

Stephen A. Schuker and Charles P. Kindleberger .The Two Postwar Eras: American

Historical Review, 86, (1981): 327-367.

THE NATURE OF POWER (SUMMARY)

Born to Command

Name:

Affiliation:

Course:

Instructor:

Date:

Born to Command

A. Briefly describe ONE perspective about politics in the 1830s expressed in the image. The perspective of 1830 politics expressed in Andrew Jackson’s cartoon holds that he was not interested in the United States’ institutions and overlooked American policies. Andrew Jackson exercised his veto power and indeed ended up treating the presidency as a monarchy.

B.  Briefly explain ONE specific event or development that led to the perspective

expressed in the image. The image came following Andrew Jackson withdrawing all of the money from the national bank and gave it the states’ “pet banks” since he disliked the national bank.

C.  Briefly explain ONE specific effect of the political developments referenced by the

image. The panic of 1937 is one specific political development event since Andrew Jackson needed people’s support to use species to purchase government land. However, the matter was unmanageable based on the fact that people wanted to purchase land, bank liquidation went into chaos, and the result was a depression in the United States.