I said invalid, but fairly reliable, the 0.64 was an outlier and should have been excluded (I think)
F F_W01 New Member Joined Jul 28, 2004 Messages 13 Oct 23, 2004 #21 I said invalid, but fairly reliable, the 0.64 was an outlier and should have been excluded (I think)
mushroom_head holey moley! Joined Jan 6, 2004 Messages 530 Location yu-en-ess-double-yu Gender Female HSC 2004 Oct 23, 2004 #22 would we lose marks if we didn't mention to discard the o.64?? otherwise i'm dead
tennille ... Joined Nov 2, 2003 Messages 3,539 Location Sydney Gender Female HSC 2004 Oct 23, 2004 #23 I think its unreliable because when the tests were repeated, different results were obtained, making it unreliable. It was reliable for 1,2,3 and 5, but because 4 was completely different, it makes it unreliable.
I think its unreliable because when the tests were repeated, different results were obtained, making it unreliable. It was reliable for 1,2,3 and 5, but because 4 was completely different, it makes it unreliable.