Samantha had a vivid memory of being kidnapped as a child by her babysitter. However, she only believed this because her brother, as a prank, had convinced her about it. In truth, the babysitter had taken her to a neighbor's home for just a brief visit. Samantha's experience of being kidnapped is an example of a(n):

False memory

Explanation:

False memory refers to memory of am event that never occurred. In psychology it false memory is a case of remembering something that didn't happen or maybe remembering an event that happened in a way that it didn't happen. It is usually vivid and is held with confidence making it hard to convince someone/the person otherwise

FALSE MEMORY.

Explanation:

False memory in psychology, is a situation where people remember an event that did not happen or differently from the way it happened. Someone with false memories can be hard to convince that the memory is false or wrong because the memories are always very clear and held with high confidence.

Factors like: associated information, misinformation, misattribution of familiarity lead to false memory.

In Samantha's case, she was pranked by her brother and convinced that she was kidnapped by her babysitter as a child, she attributed this information to the fact that the babysitter took her to a neighbor's home but it was just for a brief visit and not kidnap. This information and event made her believe that she was really kidnapped even though she was not kidnapped.

Therefore, Samantha's experience of being kidnapped is an example of a FALSE MEMORY.

answer; (you have the right of way);

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. : )