Question 1

Data should be rejected due to flawed methodology.

The researcher's methodology is flawed because it excludes large birds from the study, which can significantly impact the average wing strength of all birds in the American Northwest. This exclusion introduces bias and compromises the validity of the findings.

A) Data contradicts the control group.

This option is incorrect because there is no mention of a control group in the researcher's study. The primary issue lies not in contradiction to a control group, but rather in the flawed methodology that excludes a significant portion of the population.

B) Data were different from expectations.

While it is true that the data were different from expectations, this alone does not justify rejecting the data. Discrepancies from expectations do not inherently indicate flawed research; many valid studies produce unexpected results based on their design and methodology.

C) Data cannot be displayed graphically.

This option is incorrect because the ability to display data graphically does not affect its validity. Graphical representation is a method of presentation, not a criterion for the acceptance or rejection of data integrity.

D) Data are based on flawed methodology.

This is the correct option because the methodology used by the researcher excludes large birds, which skews the data and prevents it from accurately reflecting the average wing strength of the entire bird population in the American Northwest. Such a significant exclusion undermines the study's conclusions.

Conclusion

The correct answer is D because the exclusion of large birds due to the limitations of the researcher's net leads to a biased and incomplete dataset. All other options fail to address the core issue of methodological flaws that directly impact the reliability of the findings. Valid research must include representative samples to ensure accurate estimations, which this study does not achieve.