0
What else can I help you with?
Does a check need to have your full name on it in order to be valid?
Yes, a check does not necessarily need to have your full name on it to be valid. The important thing is that the check is made out to you or endorsed by you in order for it to be processed by the bank.
Is a promissory note valid with no consideration?
No....a promissory note is not valid without a consideration.
How long is a bank draft valid?
there is no time frame or a bank draft, it is valid for as long as you have it.
How long is a check valid after it is written?
A check is typically valid for six months after it is written.
What is the difference in accountable and reliable?
reliable is what you can depend on, accountable is what you can answer for.
A test may be reliable but not necessarily validIs it possible for a test to be valid but not reliable?
A test may be reliable but not valid. A test may not be valid but not reliable. For example, if I use a yard stick that is mislabeled to measure the distance from tee to hole in golf on different length holes, the results will be neither reliable nor valid. If you use the same stick to measure football fields that are the same length the result will reliable (repeatable, consistent) but not valid (wrong numbers of yards). There is no test that is unreliable (repeatable, consistent) and valid (measures what we are looking for).
What is the difference between a valid test and a reliable test?
Reliable indicates that each time the experiment is conducted, the same results are obtained (accuracy). Valid indicates the experiment (or test) has controlled variables and used an appropriate method/model.
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.
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.
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).
Is validity is a prerequisite of reliability?
No, validity is not a prerequisite of reliability. Reliability refers to the consistency or stability of a measure, while validity refers to the accuracy of the measure in assessing what it is intended to assess. A measure can be reliable but not valid, meaning it consistently measures something but not necessarily what it is intended to measure.
Is valid test always valid Why Give example?
A valid test is not always a reliable test. Validity refers to whether a test measures what it claims to measure, while reliability refers to the consistency of test results over time. For example, a test designed to measure mathematical ability may be valid if it accurately assesses math skills, but if the test yields vastly different scores when taken multiple times by the same individual, it lacks reliability. Thus, a test can be valid in content but still unreliable in execution.
Why valid measure is always reliable?
A valid measure accurately captures what it intends to assess, meaning it reflects the true construct or phenomenon. Because a valid measure consistently produces accurate results, it inherently exhibits reliability, as reliability refers to the consistency and stability of measurements over time. However, not all reliable measures are valid, as they may yield consistent results without accurately measuring the intended construct. Thus, while all valid measures are reliable, the reverse is not necessarily true.
Is it possible for an operational definition to be valid but not reliable?
Is it possible for an operational definition to be valid but not reliable
How test can be valid?
A test can be considered valid if it accurately measures what it is intended to assess. This involves aligning the test content with the specific knowledge or skills it aims to evaluate, ensuring that the items are representative of the subject matter. Additionally, validity can be supported through empirical evidence, such as correlating test scores with performance on related tasks or criteria. Ultimately, a valid test provides reliable insights into the abilities or knowledge of the individuals being assessed.
What is the difference between valid and reliable?
I think that with reliability we mean that the plans tha you propose are based on some spesific and realistic elements. With validity I think that we mean that these elements are true and modern.
Why do Scientists repeat experiments and compare results to test whether a conclusion is reliable or valid?
So they can be sure that the data they are releasing to the rest of the scientific community and world is actually correct.
