@YoungGirl690

YoungGirl690

Beginner

3. Dans le schéma ci-dessous, la partie haute représente la successionde différentes phases de sommeil au cours d’une nuit, et la courbe dubas, le rythme cardiaque Pouvez vous m'aider à répondre à ces questions svp ? A . A partir du schéma ci-dessus, décrivez la manière dont le rythme cardiaqueévolue en fonction des stades de sommeil.B Comparez l’architecture du 1er et du 4e cycle de sommeil. (8 lignes maximum) depuis ce schéma svp ?
Responda
Ceci est un schéma ci-dessous, la partie haute représente la succession de différentes phases de sommeil au cours d’une nuit, et la courbe du bas, le rythme cardiaque Pouvez vous m'aider à répondre à ces questions à partir de ce schéma ? a. Comment s’appelle la représentation utilisée en haut pour représenter la succession des différents types de sommeil. b. A quoi correspondent les différents états a, b , c, et d ? (1 point) c. Que veut dire REM ? Comment l’appelle-t-on en Français ? Pour quelles raisons? Quelles structures cérébrales sont principalement impliquées dans cet état ? d. A partir du schéma ci-dessus, décrivez la manière dont le rythme cardiaque évolue en fonction des stades de sommeil. d. Représentez sur le schéma la fin de chaque cycle de sommeil. e. Comparez l’architecture du 1er et du 4e cycle de sommeil. (8 lignes maximum) Merci d'avance :)
Responda
Bonjour , pouvez vous m'aidersvp ? Merci Indiquez la ou les réponse(s) exacte(s). a. Les cellules ganglionnaires sont très actives quand leur champ récepteur est entièrement éclairé. b. Les cellules ganglionnaires forment la couche la plus superficielle de la rétine. c. Les cellules ganglionnaires sont directement en contact avec les cônes. d. Les cellules ganglionnaires ont des axones longs qui relient l’œil au cerveau.
Responda
Bonjour, Quelle est la maladie qui provoque le + la déficience intellectuelle dans le monde entier ? Merci
Responda
Bonjour , Quelles sont les pires maladies du cerveau svp ? Merci
Responda
Bonjour, Quel est svp le principal handicap dans le monde qui cause la déficience intellectuelle ? A part la trisomie 21 svp ?? Merci
Responda
Bonjour , Pouvez vous m'aider svp Pour chacune des corrélations suivantes, indiquez la nature de la direction/du sens et de la force de la corrélation. Interprétez en une phrase la corrélation. Pour répondre à cela, appuyez-vous également sur l’illustration graphique des résultats
Responda
Bonsoir , J'ai une question un peu philosophique personnelle mais aimeriez vous être immorte(lle) ? Si oui , si non pourquoi ?
Responda
Bonjour,Pouvez vous svp m'aider svp à partir de ce texte de ces questions m'aider à répondre aux 3 questions ci dessous et les deux quizz svp ? One additional feature of modern science not included in this list but prevalent in scientists’ thinking and theorizing is falsifiability, a feature that has so permeated scientific practice that it warrants additional clarification. In the early 20th century, Karl Popper (1902-1994) suggested that science can be distinguished from pseudoscience (or just everyday reasoning) because scientific claims are capable of being falsified. That is, a claim can be conceivably demonstrated to be untrue. For example, a person might claim that “all people are right handed.” This claim can be tested and—ultimately—thrown out because it can be shown to be false: There are people who are left-handed. An easy rule of thumb is to not get confused by the term “falsifiable” but to understand that—more or less—it means testable.On the other hand, some claims cannot be tested and falsified. Imagine, for instance, that a magician claims that he can teach people to move objects with their minds. The trick, he explains, is to truly believe in one’s ability for it to work. When his students fail to budge chairs with their minds, the magician scolds, “Obviously, you don’t truly believe.” The magician’s claim does not qualify as falsifiable because there is no way to disprove it. It is unscientific.Popper was particularly irritated about nonscientific claims because he believed they were a threat to the science of psychology. Specifically, he was dissatisfied with Freud’s explanations for mental illness. Freud believed that when a person suffers a mental illness it is often due to problems stemming from childhood. For instance, imagine a person who grows up to be an obsessive perfectionist. If she were raised by messy, relaxed parents, Freud might argue that her adult perfectionism is a reaction to her early family experiences—an effort to maintain order and routine instead of chaos. Alternatively, imagine the same person being raised by harsh, orderly parents. In this case, Freud might argue that her adult tidiness is simply her internalizing her parents’ way of being. As you can see, according to Freud’s rationale, both opposing scenarios are possible; no matter what the disorder, Freud’s theory could explain its childhood origin—thus failing to meet the principle of falsifiability.Karl Popper was an influential thinker regarding scientific theory and reasoning.Popper argued against statements that could not be falsified. He claimed that they blocked scientific progress: There was no way to advance, refine, or refute knowledge based on such claims. Popper’s solution was a powerful one: If science showed all the possibilities that were not true, we would be left only with what is true. That is, we need to be able to articulate—beforehand—the kinds of evidence that will disprove our hypothesis and cause us to abandon it.This may seem counterintuitive. For example, if a scientist wanted to establish a comprehensive understanding of why car accidents happen, she would systematically test all potential causes: alcohol consumption, speeding, using a cell phone, fiddling with the radio, wearing sandals, eating, chatting with a passenger, etc. A complete understanding could only be achieved once all possible explanations were explored and either falsified or not. After all the testing was concluded, the evidence would be evaluated against the criteria for falsification, and only the real causes of accidents would remain. The scientist could dismiss certain claims (e.g., sandals lead to car accidents) and keep only those supported by research (e.g., using a mobile phone while driving increases risk). It might seem absurd that a scientist would need to investigate so many alternative explanations, but it is exactly how we rule out bad claims. Of course, many explanations are complicated and involve multiple causes—as with car accidents, as well as psychological phenomena.
Responda

Helpful Links

Helpful Social

Copyright © 2024 ELIBRARY.TIPS - All rights reserved.