Wiki User
∙ 12y agoIt is called repeated trials.
Wiki User
∙ 12y agoScientists encourage other scientists to review and repeat their experiments so that their hypotheses may become Scientists encourage other scientists to review and repeat their experiments so that their hypotheses may become
Yes? There is always a chance that experimental results happened by chance (something called a Type I error in Statistics which is bad, but over-emphasized). Replications (which are not done often enough) help protect us against such "accidental" effects because reproducing the results by chance is FAR less likely than just getting them once by chance. But reproducing REAL effects should be quite easy. Though if it is the same scientist, in the same lab, it is possible the results can be replicated even when they shouldn't be replicated, not by chance, but because of something systematic (dirty or faulty equipment, poor randomization, experimenter accidently communicates something to the participant, ...).
Because its so "easy" to be wrong in science ... well, in anything, but non-scientists ignore their own errors.
There are no following principles listed in the question.
trial and error
Scientists do their experimental tests ore than once, so they can reduce the effects of chance errors. this is called conducting _______________.
Repeated Trials
experiment
replicate
== ==
Scientists encourage other scientists to review and repeat their experiments so that their hypotheses may become Scientists encourage other scientists to review and repeat their experiments so that their hypotheses may become
average result is the result when you do a few times of the same experiment and get a few result then you average it.
Yes true.
they teach dum
Yes? There is always a chance that experimental results happened by chance (something called a Type I error in Statistics which is bad, but over-emphasized). Replications (which are not done often enough) help protect us against such "accidental" effects because reproducing the results by chance is FAR less likely than just getting them once by chance. But reproducing REAL effects should be quite easy. Though if it is the same scientist, in the same lab, it is possible the results can be replicated even when they shouldn't be replicated, not by chance, but because of something systematic (dirty or faulty equipment, poor randomization, experimenter accidently communicates something to the participant, ...).
These errors occur due to chance. These errors tend to cancel to each other in long run. These errors are random. They are not the results of any prejudice or bais.
It reduces the chance of making errors.