solved After watching viewing the videos, and reading the supplied material,

After watching viewing the videos, and reading the supplied material, contribute to the discussion.

Primary Post:  Contribute your initial post to our discussion. In your post, please write 350-500 words to discuss reliability and validity and its impact on knowledge. 
Two Responses: please respond to at least two posts in our discussion; 200 words or less for each. You might discuss a related experience, share a relevant resource, or provide a different perspective.

 Here’s the first post to response to:
Reliability and Validity and Its Impact on Knowledge
Recording and interpreting data requires consistency in the measure used to collect and record data. Reliability and validity are primary concepts to ensure that consistency and measure represent variables that they ought to mean. Reliability is the stability of measurement. To understand and interpret data, researchers rely on consistent methods of measurement. Test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and interrater reliability are the types of consistency utilized by psychologists. Working with test-retest reliability requires measures used to produce consistent results over time. When researchers assess a concept that they believe is stable over time, the results they acquire ought to be stable over time as well. Measure that produces different outcomes for concepts that should remain constant over time is not a good measure under test-retest. Internal consistency is the uniformity of an individual’s responses on numerous item measures across the items. Internal consistency can only be determined through data collection and analysis. Interrater reliability is the degree to which various observer’s judgments are similar.
Validity is the degree to which the results from a measurement match the parameter for which they were designed. Scores from measures with good test-retest reliability give researchers confidence that they represent what they were supposed to. Face validity, content validity, and criterion validity are the commonly used types of validities. Face validity is the extent to which the appearance “face of” a measure captures the construct of interest. Content validity is the scope to which an assessment “encompasses” the concept of interest is known as content validity. 

This is the second post to response to:
When the term reliability is used in quantitative research, it refers to how consistent measurements are within the study. Quantitative research depends on the replicability, repeatability, and stability of results to show reliability of the phenomenon studied. Validity in quantitative research refers to whether the measurements are measuring what they are intended to measure. These two terms have different meanings in qualitative research.
Qualitive research is not necessarily focused on measurable data and is most often used to make sense of phenomena rather than measuring their frequency, causation, or correlation (Leung, 2021). In qualitative research, reliability refers to the accuracy of recording the interviews or data gathered. Reliability can be enhanced by:

using detailed notes or recording the interviews,
conscientious wording of the interview questionnaire,
conducting the interviews in a neutral environment,
asking the questions in the same order and manner, and
being aware of the ‘power relationship’ between the interviewer and participants.

Another method recommended for demonstrating reliability in qualitative research is inter-rater reliability, which is having two or more researchers analyze the same data and comparing the results (Armstrong, et al., 1997). This can be time consuming and inconsistent due to the subjectivity of the data interpretation that is the foundation of qualitative research.
Validity in qualitative research is “trying to assess the accuracy of the results, as best described by the researcher, the participants, and the readers (Creswell & Poth, 2013).” This has more to do with the process used to gather the information rather than extensive time spent in the field, detailed description, and a close relationship between the researcher and the participants. Some researchers believe that the term validity should be exchanged for trustworthiness (Hayashi, et al., 2019).
The trustworthiness of a study can be corrupted by researcher bias, reactivity, and respondent bias and can be restored by credibility, authenticity, criticality, and integrity (Whittemore, et al., 2001). Credibility can be established by accurately interpreting the data. In qualitative research, authenticity can be shown by portraying the true meanings and experiences of the research participants. Criticality can be demonstrated by a systematic research design that includes a critical appraisal and analysis. Finally, integrity can be exhibited by a process that ensures interpretation and conclusions are supported by the data.