1. Alexander Hamilton’s economic program was designed primarily to

(A) prepare the United States for war in the event Britain failed to vacate its posts in the Northwest

(B) provide a platform for the fledgling Federalist Party’s 1792 campaign

(C) establish the financial stability and credit of the new government

(D) ensure northern dominance over the southern states in order to abolish slavery

(E) win broad political support for his own candidacy for the presidency in 1792

2. The development of the early nineteenth-century concept of “separate spheres” for the sexes encouraged all of the following EXCEPT

(A) acceptance of a woman as the intellectual equal of a man

(B) idealization of the “lady”

(C) designation of the home as the appropriate place for a woman

(D) emphasis on child care as a prime duty of a woman

(E) establishment of a moral climate in the home

3. The presidential election of 1840 is often considered the first “modern” election because

(A) the slavery issue was first raised in this campaign

(B) there was a very low turnout of eligible voters

(C) voting patterns were similar to those later established in the 1890’s

(D) both parties for the first time widely campaigned among all the eligible voters

(E) a second era of good feeling had just come to a close, marking a new departure in politics

4. The graph above refutes which of the following statements?

(A) There were more Black people than White people in the antebellum South.

(B) Most southern families held slaves.

(C) Most southern families lived in rural areas.

(D) The southern population was much smaller than that of the North.

(E) Slaveholders were an extremely powerful group.

5. Frederick Jackson Turner’s “frontier hypothesis” focused on the importance of

(A) the traditions of western European culture

(B) the absence of a feudal aristocracy

(C) Black people and Black slavery

(D) the conflict between capitalists and workers

(E) the existence of cheap unsettled land

6. During the closing decades of the nineteenth century, farmers complained about all of the following EXCEPT

(A) rising commodity prices

(B) high interest charges

(C) high freight rates

(D) high storage costs

(E) large middleman profits

7. The Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine did which of the following?

(A) Prohibited United States intervention in the Caribbean.

(B) Warned against European seizure of the Panama Canal.

(C) Sought to end the wave of nationalization of American-owned property in the Caribbean.

(D) Declared the United States to be the “policeman” of the Western Hemisphere.

(E) Provided United States military support for democratic revolutions in Latin America.

8. One of the principal reasons the “noble experiment” of Prohibition failed was that it led to an enormous increase in

(A) drinking among minors

(B) absenteeism among factory workers

(C) the divorce rate

(D) child abuse

(E) law enforcement costs

9. Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka was a Supreme Court decision that

(A) was a forerunner of the Kansas-Nebraska Act

(B) established free public colleges in the United States

(C) declared racially segregated public schools inherently unequal

(D) established free public elementary and secondary schools in the United States

(E) provided for federal support of parochial schools

10. Joseph McCarthy’s investigative tactics found support among many Americans because

(A) evidence substantiated his charges against the army

(B) there was widespread fear of communist infiltration of the United States

(C) both Truman and Eisenhower supported him

(D) he worked closely with the FBI

(E) he correctly identified numerous communists working in the State Department

Using expected value, is it economically better to make or buy the component?

Ans:

CaseA:.Each part costs $72.00.

Organization needs 10,000 units.

So the total cost would be $720,000.00

CaseB:.As the cost is mentioned $50,000.00 and for the setup it is roughly costing around $100,000

Adding the material cost for 1 area is $40 and rough material cost is $400,000.00 for 10,000 units.

By calculating the cost of the deficient parts it averages around $2150.

Repairing 2150 deficient parts which leads to $258,000.00

So the total cost will be $758,000 adding all the above calculated results.

On comparing both cases instead of self-manufacturing, it is better to buy the finished product itself as it is economical and saves $38,000.

2) Strategically thinking, why might management opt for other than the most economical choice?

Ans:

Strategically thinking, Teloxy management believes that even though there are higher costs associated with it, the demand always remains constant for their product. So strategically it would be better to produce the parts on own, will not only help to get the product cheaper but the company have the scope to move to a manufacturing company that can develop and expand.Costs can also be brought down by their manufacturing unit reducing the number of defective components and gain efficiencies improving their learning curve. Risks taken and learning to produce the self-made goods lead to benefits, if not now, in the long run. Also, this would be a great practice for the Manufacturing team where Teloxy might see the defect probabilities very negligible in the long run there by presenting as a more economical choice.

After reading several of the articles from the Nature debate on peer review (attached), what do you think is the best way that articles in psychology should be selected for publication? What are the key strengths of your suggested method? The weaknesses? When responding to your classmates, offer an alternative perspective to their suggestion or point out factors that they did not consider.

To complete this assignment, review the Discussion Rubric document (attached).

please also reply in one-two paragraphs to the following students posts regarding the same topic!

STUDENT ONE:

One of the processes I think is quite interesting is the open-peer-review. This takes papers through several rounds of edits of an initial scrutinization and then the traditional review (“Overview: Nature’s peer review trial,” 2006). I am fond of the hybrid system of peer review because it allows for an editor to submit it to the Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence (ETAI) so that members of the peer community can make comments without anonymity (“Systems: Opening up the process,” 2006). In addition, they ensure that the material is relevant to the criteria of ETAI and it denies the submission of pseudoscience papers. The discussion takes approximately three months with means to extend. Afterwards, the authors can then make edits to their paper or continue for a decision from an expert to review the final version and determine if it should cease movement or move forward.
I feel what makes this process so efficient is that it uses the internet to make the appropriate edits and set the author up for success. Additionally, all comments are open and allows the author to see different perspectives and how they arrived at the final review edits. This is important when considering if they should continue with their paper or find a different route entirely. However, as the article suggests, authors must expedite responses to criticism or risk having their journal rejected in an open forum (“Systems: Opening up the process,” 2006). This, as you can imagine, can be very difficult for someone who committed time to the development of the research journal. The stress over the course of three months or longer can also be difficult for the author as they may have to constantly defend their position. The article also says that the authors are more cautious when submitting a journal because of the public criticism and because any discussion can quickly lead to a rejection. I live on honest and straight-forwardness because it allows someone to know immediately that they must improve. These discussions are either a make or break for some authors which is a weakness depending on the type of person submitting the journal.

References
Overview: Nature’s peer review trial. (2006). Retrieved April 2, 2019, from https://www.nature.com/nature/peerreview/debate/nature05535.html
Systems: Opening up the process. (2006). Retrieved April, 2, 2019, from https://www.nature.com/nature/peerreview/debate/nature04994.html

STUDENT TWO:

In the last year I read a book title The Dispossessed about a physicist who runs away from an extremist socialist moon to the capitalist planet the moon orbits so that he can continue his life’s work in physics. The reason his work could not be continued on his home was the “government” (this society did not believe in governments but in the collective people) would not publish his work because his peers did not understand the science behind it nor did they want him to get all the credit for the science (Le Guin, 1974). While this is an extreme, this kind of thinking may be at play when researchers don’t get published in peer-review journals. According to the article Analysing the purpose of the peer review, 90% of articles submitted to the New England Journal of Medicine and the Lancet are rejected (Nature, 2006). This is a staggering number. While I understand not all manuscripts can (or should) be published, more should be offered to the researchers who have devoted their time to their research to better our population as a whole.

A method of publishing that seems to make the most sense to me would be a combination of the traditional peer review method we all know, and a method discussed in the article Scientific publishers should let their online readers become reviews which includes comment sections and rating systems for online peer reviewed articles (Nature, 2006). Having manuscripts that are reviewed by peers prevents wildly mistaken data from being published regularly but online comments and rating systems allows the public to have a say in what the article content is about and how it was created as well. This creates accountability for all stakeholders involved, including the readers. The only weakness in this system would be the internet trolls who would comment on articles negatively, or nonsensically, just for the sake of chaos. This may be the price to pay for having more involvement in the peer review process.

References

Le Guin, U. K. (1974). The Dispossessed. New York, NY: Harper Voyager.

Nature. (2006). Analysing the purpose of the peer review. Nature. doi:10.1038/nature04990

Nature. (2006). Scientific publishers should let their onine readers become reviews. Nature. doi:10.1038/nature04992

Conduct an in-depth analysis of an Advertising, PR, or Marketing campaign of a U.S. company that has branches in other countries. Select a campaign that had national or regional exposure and used different types of media. You should include a detailed discussion of the main message, execution styles, media strategies, and other campaign tactics that may appeal or not appeal to various multicultural groups. Briefly mention the outcomes of the campaign (i.e., whether it is successful or not). You will also conduct a SWOT analysis of the campaign where you will include a detailed discussion on what should be improved to target the audience based on what we learned in the class (i.e., what stereotypes should be avoided, what values should be emphasized and so forth). The 6-page requirement does NOT include your title page, research materials, or references. Follow APA style, use 12-point Times New Roman. Complete a 6-page APA style report.