Reliabilityin Research Works
Readersdepend on the precision of information reported in research studies. As such, scholars should ensure to provide validated and reliableconclusions in their exploration.According to Leung (2015),credible studies are supposed to have high reliability and validity.Reliability refers to the accuracy of the findings and the proceduresapplied to reach a conclusion. Researchers can prove that the resultsare reliable through evaluating the possibility of following theoriginal procedure and achieving similar results. Furthermore, theauthor provides that credible research should also be valid ordependable. I agree with Leung (2015) that credible research shoulduse a methodology that can be followed by another investigator andstill acquire similar findings. On the same note, the approach takenshould be appropriate so that further studies can be carried out tofurther the ideologies of each study. In my view, readers considerpeer-reviewed studies more reliable compared to work that is yet tobe scrutinized by professionals. As such, authors should seek peerevaluation before publishing their work in public forums such asjournals.
Althoughevery researcher strives to achieve accurate results from everystudy, Pannucci and Wilkins (2010) provide that the outcome is oftenincorrect because of bias. The authors add that the inaccuracy mainlyresults from wrong data collection method and analysis approach.However, they dispute the possibility of researchers introducingerrors deliberately.
Everyresearcher has a duty to deliver accurate information. The journalsthat publish studies, especially, statistical analyses, impose heavypenalties to the authors submitting fabricated work. Timekeeper(2013) argues that scientists are not worried about inaccuraciessince the field is self-correcting. Nevertheless, I disagree with theauthor because researchers need to apply critical thinking whilecollecting data and analyzing it to avoid bias in the first place. Ialso find it necessary to introduce restrictions to the researcherswho submit biased and deceptive statistical results for publication.
Leung,L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitativeresearch. Journalof Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4(3):324–327.
Pannucci,C.J. & Wilkins, E.G. (2010). Identifying and avoiding bias inresearch. PlasticandReconstructiveSurgery Journal, 126(2):619–625. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181de24bc.
Timekeeper,(2013, Oct. 19). Trouble at the lab. TheEconomist.Web. Retrieved on 1 June 2016 fromhttp://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21588057-scientists-think-science-self-correcting-alarming-degree-it-not-trouble