Most people are fed up with celebrities talking politics. Every time I see an ordinary person interviewed on TV about this-- and I've seen at least a dozen-- they always say they're angry about it and wish celebrities would keep their political opinions to themselves."Clearly employing the framework of the strength test, explain why this argument is weak. Make reference to sample size, response bias, and at least one other selection effect at work. (It needn't be a selection effect with a special name in the text.) 150-250 words should suffice.

Although we cannot provide the full work, as it is a personal task, we can still discuss some of the ideas that are most likely going to be present in your work.

The argument that is presented here is a very weak argument. This is due to several reasons. In this example, the sample size is very small. The person is talking about a sample size of a dozen celebrities. This is a very small number of celebrities to be interviewed. It would not lead to a conclusion that is representative of the population. Moreover, there is a risk of response bias, as the people are most likely answering in a way that is expected. Finally, there is also a risk of confirmation bias, as the speaker is a lot more likely to notice cases in which the interviewees answer in the way that he expects.

there is often only a small difference between what is legal and what is ethical when working with competitive intelligence..

answer; /// i do believe that the correct answer is (d) cooperative play; /// good luck