Validating reasoning updating my wardrobe
By following a few basic principles, any experimental design will stand up to rigorous questioning and skepticism.
Other researchers must be able to perform exactly the same experiment, under the same conditions and generate the same results.
Validity encompasses the entire experimental concept and establishes whether the results obtained meet all of the requirements of the scientific research method.
For example, there must have been randomization of the sample groups and appropriate care and diligence shown in the allocation of controls.
This extraneous causal relationship may become more apparent, as techniques are refined and honed.
If you have constructed your experiment to contain validity and reliability then the scientific community is more likely to accept your findings.
Even if your results are great, sloppy and inconsistent design will compromise your integrity in the eyes of the scientific community.
Control groups and randomization will lessen external validity problems but no method can be completely successful.
This is why the statistical proofs of a hypothesis called significant, not absolute truth.
Reliability is a necessary ingredient for determining the overall validity of a scientific experiment and enhancing the strength of the results.
Debate between social and pure scientists, concerning reliability, is robust and ongoing.
Search for validating reasoning:
The task of an argument is to provide statements (premises) that give evidence for the conclusion. Deductive argument: involves the claim that the truth of its premises guarantees the truth of its conclusion; the terms valid and invalid are used to characterize deductive arguments.