Updating robust reliability
Human judgment can vary wildly between observers, and the same individual may rate things differently depending upon time of day and current mood.
This means that such experiments are more difficult to repeat and are inherently less reliable.
The idea behind reliability is that any significant results must be more than a one-off finding and be inherently repeatable.
Other researchers must be able to perform exactly the same experiment, under the same conditions and generate the same results.
This prerequisite is essential to a hypothesis establishing itself as an accepted scientific truth.
For example, if you are performing a time critical experiment, you will be using some type of stopwatch.
Generally, it is reasonable to assume that the instruments are reliable and will keep true and accurate time.
The text in this article is licensed under the Creative Commons-License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).This will reinforce the findings and ensure that the wider scientific community will accept the hypothesis.Without this replication of statistically significant results, the experiment and research have not fulfilled all of the requirements of testability.Internal validity dictates how an experimental design is structured and encompasses all of the steps of the scientific research method.
Even if your results are great, sloppy and inconsistent design will compromise your integrity in the eyes of the scientific community.This means you're free to copy, share and adapt any parts (or all) of the text in the article, as long as you give appropriate credit and provide a link/reference to this page. You don't need our permission to copy the article; just include a link/reference back to this page.