In its aqueous solution, 32% of a substance dissociates to release hydroxide ions. Which of the following is true for the substance? (3 points) It is a weak acid
It is a weak base.
It is a strong acid
It is a strong base.
*please only answer is you have the real answer bc I really need to bring up my grade*

It is a weak base.

Explanation:

A base is a substance that releases hydroxide ion (OH-) when in an aqueous solution, according to Svante Arrhenius definition of a base. However, a base is said to be either strong or weak depending on it is able to dissociate.

A weak base is a base that does not completely dissociate into hydroxide ions in an aqueous solution while a strong base dissociates completely. According to this question, 32% of a basic substance ( because it can dissociate into OH-) dissociates to release hydroxide ions. This means that since it does not totally dissociate i.e. 100%, it is a WEAK BASE.

1. the question asks the most appropriate, which seems to rule out "all of the above." your choice appears to be the correct one.

2. the protocol described is good for identifying correlation, but not cause and effect. for cause/effect, you need to devise a protocol that will assign the treatment (or not) to groups that have essentially the same "demographics" with respect to all the other variables. your choice regarding control group seems appropriate. random assignment of treatment (choice d) may be appropriate also. (i think you can argue that b and d are just different descriptions of the same method.)

3. d will randomize the birds, but may not guarantee there are 10 in each group. e will do both, so seems the better choice.

comment on question 2

based on the problem statement, it seems clear that confident, attentive drivers are more likely to use daytime running lights. so, the protocol might need to be devised in such a way that the lights would be turned on or off without the driver's knowledge. (an attentive driver will figure it out.) assigning a confident, attentive driver to a group required to drive without running lights might mess with his/her confidence and attentiveness. you don't want your experiment to do that. (nor do you want the experiment to subject a driver to greater risk of accident as a consequence of driving without running lights.) experiments involving human safety are always problematic.