IM GOING TO DELETE THIS ACC SO POINT GIVEAWAY MODERATOR DELETE THIS :/​

For each of the following, mark whether it is a possible confounder (a factor that mixes up the results, making it look like candy is to blame when it's a causal (or causation) link which supports the argument that candy causes criminal behavior (ie, explains how candy leads to criminality ), or neither (an irrelevant factor, something that may cause people to become criminals but has nothing to do with eating candy). choose your answers based only< on the information given. additives in candy- additives found in candy may adversely affect brain development of young children in ways that could contribute towards adult aggression. impulsive personality-- kids who are highly impulsive and have trouble delaying gratification are more likely to eat candy every day as children and more likely to disobey laws as adults. violent abuse-- children who suffer violent abuse are more likely to become violent adults and commit violent crimes. gender- boys are overwhelmingly more likely to commit violent crimes

But on an april morning in 1959, i heard a mother of four, having coffee with four other mothers in a suburban development fifteen miles from new york, say in a tone of quiet desperation, “the problem.” and the others knew, without words, that she was not talking about a problem with her husband, or her children, or her home. suddenly they realized they all shared the same problem, the problem that has no name. which best describes the connotation of the word “desperation”? negative, because the woman is feeling confused negative, because the woman is expressing hopelessness positive, because the woman is expressing herself positive, because the woman and the mothers are in agreement

Look at the historical context sheet. how might settlers’ attitudes towards native americans have changed from the 1630s to the 1650s? how might settlers’ attitudes toward the land have changed from the 1630s to the 1650s? explain you answer. (4 points)