Hi guys! Can I please get help with this?

For each of the following, mark whether it is a possible confounder (a factor that mixes up the results, making it look like candy is to blame when it's a causal (or causation) link which supports the argument that candy causes criminal behavior (ie, explains how candy leads to criminality ), or neither (an irrelevant factor, something that may cause people to become criminals but has nothing to do with eating candy). choose your answers based only< on the information given. additives in candy- additives found in candy may adversely affect brain development of young children in ways that could contribute towards adult aggression. impulsive personality-- kids who are highly impulsive and have trouble delaying gratification are more likely to eat candy every day as children and more likely to disobey laws as adults. violent abuse-- children who suffer violent abuse are more likely to become violent adults and commit violent crimes. gender- boys are overwhelmingly more likely to commit violent crimes

Martin, a 32-year-old human relations administrator at a university, believes that all professors over age 50 are incapable of learning the new educational technologies and are content to keep presenting their same "tired, boring" lectures. he often expresses these views to other administrators and does not encourage any of the "older" faculty members to attend professional development meetings related to new teaching approaches nor does he suggest that the university send them to any of the technology conferences. martin is exhibiting

11. why do citizens have to register to vote?