We have discussed many ways of evaluating research or research-based claims. which one of the following descriptions is the least reasonable approach? a. one way to approach evaluating research claims is to take it at face value based on a popular press article. this is because findings in the popular press are always critically based on scientific journals and wouldn't be published without a reason. b. one way to approach evaluating research claims is to conduct your own research. most individuals who are posing questions already have knowledge relevant to conducting research, it is often inexpensive, and conducting your own research is the most directly answers the question you are interested in. c. one way to approach evaluating research claims is to read empirical articles. although you may find contradictions, these are findings by experts who are trained in conducting research. d. one way to approach evaluating research claims is to look at similar findings related to the original research questions you had in mind, because this often leads to finding replications that suggest that the claims are strong.

critically based on scientific journals and wouldn't be published without a reason.B. One way to approach evaluating research claims is to conduct your own research. Most individuals who are posing questions already have knowledge relevant to conducting research, it is often inexpensive, and conducting your own research is the most directly answers the question you are interested in.

Explanation:

Conducting your own research is the least reasonable approach. Why?

Not all reaseach call be easily replicated since some may be complex and very expensive rightly contradicting the statement here that research isn't expensive. Also conducting your own research does not however guarantee the genuinity of the result, every research is prone to errors or mistakes. Lastly, not all individuals that pose questions to a research have the requisite knowledge to conduct that research.

if interdependence implies a two-way dependence, and if each partner is equally dependent on the other for success, then there is an equal commitment to the making the partnership successful. the advantage is sustainability of the relationship, the disadvantage is that decisions are "democratic" and therefore may take longer to reach and more likely to be a compromise (which is not always the best solution). as the interdependence moves away from equality, the decisions become more influenced by the more independent partner. in the extreme the relationship becomes more dictatorial and more like "master-slave". generally the relationship has less commitment in both directions and is more likely to be temporary.

if one generalizes (and one shouldn't), equity partnerships, which is probably what is implied by interdependence, can be slow to progress or change but durable. the extreme alternative, independent-dependent partnerships tend to be efficient but more fragile.

hope this but you will have to site your own evidence. : )

we need an attachment to see what you are talking about.