Sunday, December 1, 2019

Story image for lavish wedding from

Monaco prepares for royal wedding — with Canadian ... 30, 2013
According to Britain's Daily Mail, the bride hosted a lavish pre-wedding celebration for her bridesmaids aboard a yacht. Santo Domingo is known for her love of ...
Story image for lavish wedding from Christian Science Monitor

Over 55 and in love: Seniors make up 8 percent of wedding ...

Christian Science Monitor-Aug. 22, 2013
The trend in part is being driven by a desire to emulate the lavish weddings of celebrities of all ages. But it's also one of the results of a new "everything goes" ...
Story image for lavish wedding from Daily Mail

Just married! John Legend and Chrissy Teigen tie the knot in ...

Daily Mail-Sep. 14, 2013
... Teigen tie the knot in an intimate ceremony at lavish estate in Lake Como ... 'I do' in a lavish wedding at the hotel Villa Pizzo on Lake Como, Italy on Saturday.
See Chrissy Teigen's Vera Wang Wedding Dress
Blog-ABC News (blog)-Sep. 16, 2013
Story image for lavish wedding from Daily Mail
Daily Mail

Jimmy Kimmel marries Molly McNearney in star-studded Ojai ...

Los Angeles Times-Jul. 15, 2013
Jimmy Kimmel marries Molly McNearney in star-studded Ojai wedding ... The couple wed on Saturday in Ojai in a lavish country ceremony that hosted 300 ...
Here comes the bride? Gabourey Sidibe pranks Jimmy ...
Highly Cited-Daily Mail-Jul. 16, 2013

1 comment:

Pearl Necklace said...

In the first variant, when you could choose only one alternative, the greatest significance of the received first alternative, and the second - third and third - third.
It turns out that the significance of any alternative to some extent is determined by the selection process. In the first embodiment, by limiting the freedom of choice, the Respondent determines the importance of one alternative among all the proposed (in this example, among the four). In the second option the importance of choosing alternatives is not only among all we offer, but among themselves, when there is a choice of two or three alternatives. In the example in the second embodiment, when the Respondent was asked to choose two most relevant alternatives, the third alternative were preferred not only among others, but compared to the first, which is the second largest, i.e., ranked second by number of votes. This is natural as choosing meaningful alternatives, the Respondent ranks them in order of importance - first, then second, third, etc.
Somewhat different is the choice of important alternatives in the third embodiment, when respondents are offered an unlimited variety of alternatives. In this case, the Respondent first selects two or three or four from the entire list as most important compared to other, and then ranks them and selects the most significant among them. No matter how many alternatives we have not offered to the Respondent, significant always happens a bit. Therefore, any number of answer options respondents choose no more than two or three. On average, as the practice of questioning, of not more than 1.6-1.7 choice, regardless of the number of proposed alternatives.
The difference in responses to the choices alternatives can be explained by the fact that there is an alternation of significant alternatives. For example, the part of the respondents chooses the first alternative, when allowed to choose two or an unlimited number of alternatives, the other part - the second or the third alternatives. This alternation of a number of selected alternatives leading to a random distribution of responses of respondents on important alternatives and give a different percentage distribution of the choices of alternatives to the proposed question. Equally important is that, from any amount of answers does cent of the total number of respondents or the total number of elections. Depending on this percentage distribution of the answers can be different and essentially incomparable.
In connection with the unequal percentage distribution of responses of respondents on important alternatives depending on the choices of alternatives, the question arises, what percentage distribution is correct, true, correspond more to the real situation. For example, what attracts the employees working for the firm, which alternative is most important: earnings, benefits, prestige points, the interest to work? Because depending on the answer to this question must change and the focus of various activities to attract workers and their fastening.