To determine which statement best describes the data in this investigation regarding the observation of bees visiting flowers, let's analyze each of the given options:
1. The data would be more accurate if she carried out all the observations in one day so weather conditions would be constant.
While making all observations on the same day might control for weather conditions, it does not account for variability over time. Observing bees on different days can provide a more comprehensive picture of their behavior.
2. The data would be more valid if she made the observations daily for two months.
Observing the bees over a longer period, such as two months, would provide a larger sample size and account for day-to-day variations and other external factors (like weather changes). This extended observation would lead to more reliable and valid data regarding the behavior of bees visiting different flowers.
3. The data she collected is inaccurate because the investigation is not repeatable.
This statement is not necessarily true. The data's repeatability depends on the methodology used. If she follows a consistent procedure, others could replicate her study. Inaccuracy in the data requires evidence of methodological flaws or inconsistent measurements, which the problem does not indicate.
4. The data she collected cannot be plotted in a line graph because it is qualitative.
This statement is incorrect since the number of bees visiting flowers is quantitative (count data) and can indeed be plotted in a multiple line graph.
Considering these analyses, the best choice is:
The data would be more valid if she made the observations daily for two months.
This option acknowledges that longer observation periods generally result in more reliable and comprehensive data. Thus, the correct statement is:
The data would be more valid if she made the observations daily for two months.
