Want this question answered?
hypothesis (or your theory) methodology (or how I'm gonna proof it) -- this must be repeatable to be truly scientific results (scriptographical display of test) conclusion (what happened which supports you argument)
A reliable measure is consistent and yields consistent results, so it may not be measuring the intended construct accurately (lack validity). On the other hand, a valid measure accurately assesses the intended construct, but it must be consistent and produce stable results (reliable) to ensure that the measurements are dependable and trustworthy.
Check if the results are valid
a valid investigation is an effective investigation i think. The results turn out to be what you had inferred.
Repeatable
booty
repeated trials
Yes he is and has degrees in Psychology, and Philosophy
A test may be reliable yet not valid, The results can end up being reliable, in other words certain to have yielded properly based on input. But the results may not be trustworthy.
confounding variable
reliable.
The range of a function is the interval (or intervals) over which the independent variable is valid, i.e. results in a valid value of the function.