Question

which of the following would be a valid hypothesis for a scientific investigation about food shopping decision affect food security?

A spending more money on food results in food of higher nutritional value

B why do people shop at supermarkets more often than local farmers markets

C how is the cost of a food related to its nutritional value

D I prefer the taste of foods purchase from local farmer market​

Answer 1

Answer: Learning is essential to our existence. Just like food nourishes our bodies, information and continued learning nourishes our minds. ... Today, continuous learning forms a necessary part in acquiring critical thinking skills and discovering new ways of relating to people from different cultures.

Explanation: Learning is essential to our existence. Just like food nourishes our bodies, information and continued learning nourishes our minds. ... Today, continuous learning forms a necessary part in acquiring critical thinking skills and discovering new ways of relating to people from different cultures.

Answer 2

A valid hypothesis is one that is testable and falsifiable by experimental findings. Thus, A would be the right option.

What are hypotheses?

Hypotheses are general statements with no experimental tests. They can be tested using experiments and be falsifiable if found wanting.

Food security refers to constant access to food of adequate nutritional value by the populace of a place. The access must be both in terms of availability and economic affordability.

If the cost of food has a relationship with their nutritional values, this will definitely affect the food security of a place.

Thus, the only falsifiable hypothesis would be "spending more money on food results in food of higher nutritional value".

More on hypotheses can be found here: https://brainly.com/question/17173491

#SPJ2