Answer:
The paper showed signs of bias and lacked proper citations.
Explanation:
Can i have thanks, 5 star brainliest? Tell me if right!!
Answer:
The correct answer is C) the paper showed signs of bias and lacked proper citations.
explanaion:
The factor that could have led to this conclusion was that the paper showed signs of bias and lacked proper citations.
A historian published on the Ancient Greek leader Alexander the Great. However, most scholars reject his paper on the basis that research is not reliable. So the factor that could have led to this conclusion was that the paper showed signs of bias and lacked proper citations.
A professional historian must perform an impeccable job in their papers. It knows that the citation of reliable sources and impartiality are going to validate its work. If those elements do not exist in the research, scholars are going to reject the results of the research. Β
The other options of the question were, a) the historian chose a subject that was unpopular, b) the paper credited too many sources by renowned historians, d) the historian taught history at a prestige but small university, and e) the historian maintained personal historical blogs. Β
