dear you will find information in links below:
www.npmj.org/article.asp?issn=1117-1936;year=2015;volume=22;issue...
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/10bd/800f7b10c268ad49e23233fbdd2bd4e3ff05.pdf
Hi Ajit, sorry to be blunt, but if you have been on this site for some time you really should know the answer.
The answer is reproducibility of published experiments and peer review.
If scientist A publishes an experiment that scientists B, C, D, etc. cannot reproduce then scientist A is in big trouble and will loose credibility, lose peer support and any chance of funding.
Examples; look at Pons and Fleischmann's cold fusion debacle, Elizabeth Holm's Theranos scandal, etc, etc.
@ Mosab, can you give an answer in your own words and not just post links?
It is easy. 1) Read the literature, 2) understand the literature, 3) form an opinion, 4) state your opinion.
Validity of scientific research is a tricky question. As we know scientific research can be experimental and non-experimental. When we think of scientific research, most often we consider experimental research only. In an experiment, there must be dependent variables and independent variables.
An experiment is valid, only if observed changes in the dependent variable are actually due to the independent variable alone and the results of the experiment apply to the real world outside the experimental setting such as a laboratory. The first condition is a case of internal validity and the second is a case of external validity.
An experiment is said to have high internal validity when the treatment factors that have been manipulated (independent variables) actually have a genuine effect on the observed effects (dependent variables). In other words, the experimental treatment alone should make the difference rather than other extraneous factors. A study with high internal validity permits conclusions on true cause and effect relationships. After the experiment is completed, you are likely to make some claims that your research findings have implications for other settings and at other times. When you do so, you should examine the external validity of these claims too, that is, the extent to which the findings of the study can be generalized. Remember, you would achieve nothing, if your observed relationships between the variables were valid only in the experimental setting!
You may read more from Campbell and Stanley (1963).
Campbell, D. and Stanley, J. 1963. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. In: Gage, N.L. Handbook of Research on Teaching. Rand McNally, Chicago, pp. 171-247.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Microbiology
- Scientific Research