The narrator's mother didn't appreciate the narrator's results because ?->(Show Answer!)

1. The narrator's mother didn't appreciate the narrator's results because

Write Comment

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->Roshan was so absorbed———–his work that he didn’t even raise his head.....

QA->Name of the Florida inmate who has become the longest-serving prisoner to be exonerated using DNA evidence and he was released from a Florida prison, where he had spent 35 years for a crime he didn"t commit?....

QA->The clerk...helped us didn't expect anything in return ....

QA->Mother Teressa"s Mother....

QA->what we call for "Mother’s or father’s mother "....

MCQ->The narrator's mother didn't appreciate the narrator's results because....

MCQ-> Study the following information and answer the questions given below it.Seven members H, I, J, K, L, M and N are working in different cities Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Chennai, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Delhi and Mumbai not necessarily in the same order. Each one has a different mother tongue Tamil, Kannada, Telugu, Hindi, Marathi, Punjabi and Bangla not necessarily in the same order. J works in Bangalore and his mother tongue is not Tamil or Marathi. K’s mother tongue is Punjabi and he works in Ahmedabad. L and M do not work in Chennai and none of them has Marathi mother tongue. I works in Hyderabad and his mother tongue is Telugu. The one who works in Delhi has Bangla mother tongue. N works in Mumbai and his mother tongue is Hindi. L does not work in Kolkata.What is J’s mother tongue ?
....

MCQ->The question below consists of a set of labelled sentences. Out of the four options given, select the most logical order of the sentences to form a coherent paragraph.P- And if I think about something which didn't happen I start thinking about all the other things which didn't happen. Q- But there is only ever one thing which happened at a particular time and a particular place. R- And there are an infinite number of things which didn't happen at that time and that place. S- A lie is when you say something happened which didn't happen.....

MCQ-> People are continually enticed by such "hot" performance, even if it lasts for brief periods. Because of this susceptibility, brokers or analysts who have had one or two stocks move up sharply, or technicians who call one turn correctly, are believed to have established a credible record and can readily find market followings. Likewise, an advisory service that is right for a brief time can beat its drums loudly. Elaine Garzarelli gained near immortality when she purportedly "called" the 1987 crash. Although, as the market strategist for Shearson Lehman, her forecast was never published in a research report, nor indeed communicated to its clients, she still received widespread recognition and publicity for this call, which was made in a short TV interview on CNBC. Still, her remark on CNBC that the Dow could drop sharply from its then 5300 level rocked an already nervous market on July 23, 1996. What had been a 40-point gain for the Dow turned into a 40-point loss, a good deal of which was attributed to her comments.The truth is, market-letter writers have been wrong in their judgments far more often than they would like to remember. However, advisors understand that the public considers short-term results meaningful when they are, more often than not, simply chance. Those in the public eye usually gain large numbers of new subscribers for being right by random luck. Which brings us to another important probability error that falls under the broad rubric of representativeness. Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman call this one the "law of small numbers.". The statistically valid "law of large numbers" states that large samples will usually be highly representative of the population from which they are drawn; for example, public opinion polls are fairly accurate because they draw on large and representative groups. The smaller the sample used, however (or the shorter the record), the more likely the findings are chance rather than meaningful. Yet the Tversky and Kahneman study showed that typical psychological or educational experimenters gamble their research theories on samples so small that the results have a very high probability of being chance. This is the same as gambling on the single good call of an advisor. The psychologists and educators are far too confident in the significance of results based on a few observations or a short period of time, even though they are trained in statistical techniques and are aware of the dangers.Note how readily people over generalize the meaning of a small number of supporting facts. Limited statistical evidence seems to satisfy our intuition no matter how inadequate the depiction of reality. Sometimes the evidence we accept runs to the absurd. A good example of the major overemphasis on small numbers is the almost blind faith investors place in governmental economic releases on employment, industrial production, the consumer price index, the money supply, the leading economic indicators, etc. These statistics frequently trigger major stock- and bond-market reactions, particularly if the news is bad. Flash statistics, more times than not, are near worthless. Initial economic and Fed figures are revised significantly for weeks or months after their release, as new and "better" information flows in. Thus, an increase in the money supply can turn into a decrease, or a large drop in the leading indicators can change to a moderate increase. These revisions occur with such regularity you would think that investors, particularly pros, would treat them with the skepticism they deserve. Alas, the real world refuses to follow the textbooks. Experience notwithstanding, investors treat as gospel all authoritative-sounding releases that they think pinpoint the development of important trends. An example of how instant news threw investors into a tailspin occurred in July of 1996. Preliminary statistics indicated the economy was beginning to gain steam. The flash figures showed that GDP (gross domestic product) would rise at a 3% rate in the next several quarters, a rate higher than expected. Many people, convinced by these statistics that rising interest rates were imminent, bailed out of the stock market that month. To the end of that year, the GDP growth figures had been revised down significantly (unofficially, a minimum of a dozen times, and officially at least twice). The market rocketed ahead to new highs to August l997, but a lot of investors had retreated to the sidelines on the preliminary bad news. The advice of a world champion chess player when asked how to avoid making a bad move. His answer: "Sit on your hands”. But professional investors don't sit on their hands; they dance on tiptoe, ready to flit after the least particle of information as if it were a strongly documented trend. The law of small numbers, in such cases, results in decisions sometimes bordering on the inane. Tversky and Kahneman‘s findings, which have been repeatedly confirmed, are particularly important to our understanding of some stock market errors and lead to another rule that investors should follow.Which statement does not reflect the true essence of the passage? I. Tversky and Kahneman understood that small representative groups bias the research theories to generalize results that can be categorized as meaningful result and people simplify the real impact of passable portray of reality by small number of supporting facts. II. Governmental economic releases on macroeconomic indicators fetch blind faith from investors who appropriately discount these announcements which are ideally reflected in the stock and bond market prices. III. Investors take into consideration myopic gain and make it meaningful investment choice and fail to see it as a chance of occurrence. IV. lrrational overreaction to key regulators expressions is same as intuitive statistician stumbling disastrously when unable to sustain spectacular performance.....

MCQ-> Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Certain words are printed in bold to help you to locate them while answering some of the questions. They yearly festival was close at hand: The store room was packed with silk fabrics, gold ornaments, clay bowls full of sweet curd and platefuls of sweetmeats. The orders had been placed with shops well in advance: The mother was sending out gifts to everyone. The eldest son, a government servant, lived with his wife and children in far off lands. The second son had left home at an early age: As a merchant he travelled all over the world. The other sons had split up over petty squabbles, and they now lived in homes of their own. The relatives were spread all across the world. They rarely visited. The youngest son, left in the company of a servant, was soon bored left her and stood at the door all day long, waiting and watching. His mother, thrilled and excited, loaded the presents on trays and plates, covered them with colourful kerchiefs, and sent them off with maids and servants. The neighbours looked on. The day came to an end. All the presents had been sent off. The child came back into the house and dejectedly said to his mother, “Maa, you gave a present to everyone, but you didn’t give me anything!” His mother laughed, “I have given all the gifts away to everyone, now see what’s left for you.” She kissed him on the forehead. The child said in a tearful voice, “Don’t I get a gift?” “You’ll get it when you go far away.” “But when I am close to you, don’t I get something from your own hands?” His mother reached out her arms and drew him to her, “This is all I have in my own hands. It is the most precious of all.”Why did the woman’s second son travel?
....