Mitchell’s smartphone is two years old and he would like to have a new one. This time, he wants to make sure that it has a longer battery charge and better geographic coverage since he is traveling three days a week for his new job. Mitchell is most likely to use for this purchase.

Mitchell is more likely to use comparative buying for this.

Explanation:

It can be understood that the specifications that the person wants and the product thus desired by them can warrant a different or a specific type of shopping method for them to use.

This case is a clear one of comparative buying.

He wants a phone with a better charge and geographic services so he will go online and compare phones in his suited price range that offer this service and chose by comparison the best one for its rate.

i really need the answer guys

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. : )