Cerys has read all the books on mythology in his school’s library, and he is intrigued by how the stories all seem to have similar elements and themes. in each story there is a hero and a villain, a damsel in distress, a wise old man or woman to guide the hero, and a funny sidekick. jung would tell cerys that the commonalities are there because the story creators were all tapping the
a) archetypes.
b) object relations.
c) psychodynamics.
d) mandalas.

A) archetypes.

Explanation:

Archetypes refers to a very generalized and typical characteristics that we used to describe a person with one particular position. It is very common to see similar archetypes in different stories to help the readers understand the Character's psyche.

This is what Cerys had in her mind when she is observing the characters that exist in stories. I'm sure most people are also familiar with such archetypes.

- The hero : Brave, Gallant , Honorable, strong, Capable

- The Damsel : Beautiful, Helpless, Fair mannered, Soft-spoken

- The Villain : Ruthless, cruel,  Willing to bend rules to get their goals.

- The sidekick : Funny, Accommodating, Typically weaker and less capable than the heroes

Etc.

Carl jung believed that every individuals tend to developed such archetypes from daily observations that we do since early age. It  create some sort of 'expectation' that we have toward people with specific status.

if interdependence implies a two-way dependence, and if each partner is equally dependent on the other for success, then there is an equal commitment to the making the partnership successful. the advantage is sustainability of the relationship, the disadvantage is that decisions are "democratic" and therefore may take longer to reach and more likely to be a compromise (which is not always the best solution). as the interdependence moves away from equality, the decisions become more influenced by the more independent partner. in the extreme the relationship becomes more dictatorial and more like "master-slave". generally the relationship has less commitment in both directions and is more likely to be temporary.

if one generalizes (and one shouldn't), equity partnerships, which is probably what is implied by interdependence, can be slow to progress or change but durable. the extreme alternative, independent-dependent partnerships tend to be efficient but more fragile.

hope this but you will have to site your own evidence. : )