Working from specific evidence to a general conclusion is an example of what?
A) Analogy
B) Induction
C) Circular reasoning
D) Deduction
E) Cause and effect
Answer: B
Explanation: B) With inductive reasoning, you work from specific evidence to a general conclusion. To convince your boss to change a certain production process, you could point out that every company that has adopted it has increased profits.
You might also like to view...
A product in the maturity stage will most likely require ________ advertising
A) informative B) comparative C) persuasive D) reminder E) covert
Drawing conclusions naturally involves a degree of subjectivity, but your goal should be to remain objective
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
National Trucking Corporation files a suit in a state court against Odell's Service Company (OSC), and wins. OSC appeals the court's decision, asserting that the evidence presented at trial to support National's claim was so scanty that no reasonable jury could have found for the plaintiff. Therefore, argues OSC, the appellate court should reverse the trial court's decision. Is the appellate court likely to reverse the trial court's findings with respect to the facts? If not, why not? What are an appellate court's options after reviewing a case?
What will be an ideal response?
Which of the following is NOT true about retailing in different nations?
A. Cultural differences influence preferences for online shopping. B. New retailing ideas rarely spread to other countries. C. Retailers in slow-growth developing countries have looked abroad for growth. D. Mass-merchandising requires mass markets. E. Less-developed countries often don't have the income to support mass distribution retailers.