0
Is it possible for an operational definition to be valid but not reliable?
Wiki User
∙ 7y ago
Is it possible for an operational definition to be valid but not reliable
Wiki User
∙ 7y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
What statement is not a valid description or definition of knowledge?
Information has been uncovered about the Battle of the Little Bighorn
What is deductively valid argument?
A deductively valid argument is if the premises are true then the conclusion is certainly true, not possibly true. The definition does not say that the conclusion is true.
What is the definition of cogent?
An argument that is strong, sound, and valid is a cogent one.
What is the definition of valid sources?
Valid sources are materials used to back up a position, whether in speeches, writing or other kinds of debatable subjects. Good judgment is necessary when looking for a valid source as the Internet has made information overload an issue when researching.
What is the synonym of dependable?
Dependable, reputable, trustworthy, good, well-founded, authentic, valid, genuine, sound, true, faithful, devoted, steadfast, staunch, constant, loyal, trusty, dedicated, unfailing, truthful, honest, safe, fail-safe, responsible, established, proven. Does that answer your question? :)
Why is it possible to have a reliable measure that is not valid but impossible to have a valid measure that is not reliable?
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.
A test may be reliable but not necessarily validIs it possible for a test to be valid but not reliable?
No, for a test to be valid, it must also be reliable. Reliability refers to the consistency of the test results, while validity refers to the accuracy of the test in measuring what it is supposed to measure. A test cannot be valid if it is not reliable.
Is a reliable test necessarily valid?
In my view reliable test is always valid.
What is the definition of valid?
Valid refers to something that is sound, reasonable, or convincing according to established rules or principles. It indicates that an argument or statement is logically and factually accurate.
Can a test be reliable and yet not valid?
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.
What is operational learning?
Operational learning is used for making mindful decisions. It depends on a person's processing and sensory abilities when they are supplied with valid knowledge and data.
What is the definition of Valid Experiment?
cheese
Explain how you can make a reliable and a valid investigation?
To ensure a reliable investigation, use a rigorous and systematic approach, including clearly defining the research question, collecting data accurately, and analyzing the information thoroughly. To establish validity, ensure that the chosen research methods and tools are appropriate for addressing the research question and that the data collected accurately reflects the phenomenon being studied. It is also important to consider potential biases, confounding variables, and limitations of the study to enhance the validity of the investigation.
Sampling techniques can provide statistically reliable and valid survey results except?
when there are errors in sampling design, such as biases in selecting participants or a non-representative sample, which can lead to inaccurate results.
Does a post dated check comply with the definition of a check and is such a check a valid negotiable instrument?
no it does not complt with the definition of a cheque and its not a valid negotiable instrument
What is the difference between slection crieteria and validity and reliability?
Social and Medical sciences uses these statistical concepts. ideally, we have to measure the same way each time, but intrasubject, interobserver and intraobserver variance occur, so we have to anticipate and evaluate them. In short, it is the repeatability of a measurement, by you, myself and everybody person or instrument. Validity is how much the mean measure that we got is near of the true answer or value. So, an instrument can be reliable but not valid, valid but not reliable, both valid and reliable, nor valid neither reliable. I suggest that you imagine a target: you can aim and 1) always get the center (both valid and reliable) 2) always get the same distant point (reliable but not valid) 3) err much around the true center (valid but not reliable - the mean and median of your arrow's shot will get the center) 4) err much around the another center, false one (nor valid neither reliable) I did not understood exactly what selection criteria have to do with the rest of question, so, left in blank ;-)
Give an example of how a test may be reliable but not valid?
A bathroom scale that consistently shows your weight as 10 pounds less than your actual weight, but always produces the same result when you step on it multiple times, can be considered reliable (consistent) but not valid (accurate).
