<span>The answer is resistance. It is
loosely defined as a client's unwillingness to discuss a particular topic in
therapy.</span>
<span>There are uncountable reasons
why clients can be resistant within a therapeutic relationship. People of all
cultures, natures, and personalities visit psychologists, each with their own
reasons for entering therapy. Some people may be ordered or referred by a third
party to enter therapy. Since they are not there of their own will, these
clients are often unwilling to be there and can show very obvious struggle to
the process. Regardless, many clients show some sort of resistance to the
emotional pain that change demands. Clients can be unwilling and opposed to
change even if it is what they desire, as change can be difficult, emotionally
painful, or scary.</span>
Answer:
Accelerations are equal in both cases.
Explanation:
No matter the initial speed you are able to put in to any balls, acceleration in this case (free falling) is always equal, because is the gravity which accelerate in this model of study, and gravity is always the same. The cases that gravity could not be the same, it's the case when you are to far from Earth surface.
Answer:
The probability of having a child with this disease is still a 50% one
Explanation:
The parents are wrong here supposing that their next child would inherit the autosomal dominant disorder gen.This could have well happened with their first-born but it didn't, and so it may or may not happen with their second child.
In an autosomal dominant disorder, there is one mutated gen that is dominant (it is located on one of the nonsex chromosomes). A person that carries a mutated gen has a 50% probability of passing this gen to their offspring. This is regardless of the number of children they had had before.
Answer:
self actualize
Explanation:
happy marriages allow partners to be fulfilled with each other by making marriage a happy union which encourages them to develop to their full potential hence making their health and easier to live.
Answer:
Mischel proposed that behaviors are determined mostly by "SITUATIONAL CUES". Up to that point, psychologists in his field had believed that "TRAITS" were responsible for a person’s behavior. Mischel’s idea has come to be called "MISCHEL'S COGNITIVE-AFFECTIVE PERSONALITY MODEL", and the debate over it is known as the "PERSON"/situation debate.
Explanation:
Previously existing trait theories suggests that a person's behavior depends on his/her traits, and they are consistent in different situations.
Walter Mischel criticized this theory and suggests that the way people behave is determined by the situation they find themselves in, and not just the traits they possess. His idea is known as "Mischel's cognitive-affective personality model".
The debate between Mischel and the proponent of trait theories is called the "trait vs state" or the Person-Situation debate.
