- Compare and contrast peer reviews and technical reviews.
A peer reviewed article is one that has been verified and evaluated by researchers and specialists in the field before it has been published. Peer reviews are documented and critical on the content, and are completed by peers that were not involved in research being published, and are not related to the research in terms of funding. These reviews are in-depth, and critique assumptions, calculations, and conclusions, in addition to providing alternative interpretations on the subjects (Definition of Peer Review, 2016). Overall, the purpose of a peer review is to confirm that the research conducted was adequate in terms of research and technical writing standards. In contrast to this, a technical review critiques the compliance of the research completed in order to make sure it fulfills industry standards, and common scientific standards (Definition of Peer Review, 2016). This means that the research is reviewed to make sure that the techniques used to obtain the results were not skewed because of poor instrument setup, procedures, or failure to follow the Scientific Method or something similar. If the techniques do not technically comply, then the obtained results are inadmissible to the scholarly community and the research is not valid.
- Explain the development of a working hypothesis.
A working hypothesis is an educated guess and is used as a foundation for a research project. Unlike a normal hypothesis, this one is not meant to be proven right or wrong, but is to be used to allow for new hypotheses and sub-hypotheses to be developed, organize existing research, and help to develop research tools. The development of the working hypothesis is important because it affects the beginnings of the research, such as what tests are conducted and the expectations of the quality of the data collected (Politics & Ideas, 2014). When developing a working hypothesis, the researcher should come up with something that is very specific and limited in scope, such that it focuses only on the research at hand. It should be developed as a statement of research expectations to the research project, and should be constructed to facilitate inquiry about the results (Politics & Ideas, 2014). The goal of the working hypothesis should be to state the purpose of the research and identify what variables are to be used. To do this, the constructed hypothesis must be logical, use precise language, and should be testable by research, it should be written to propose that if something is done, something else will result.
- Discuss alternatives to the scientific method.
An alternative to the scientific method is to explore scientific investigations through a wide range of inputs, and viewing their various outputs. Following this, the data should be gathered and interpreted through testing ideas, and then the information should be released to the scientific community. Once released, the data should undergo further testing, new questions should be investigated, and new scientific knowledge should be applied. This process is iterative and dynamic and involves a community of scientists sharing knowledge on a subject through many different activities, rather than one researchers working on just one activity. Another alternative to the scientific method is through analysis by argument and logic, which is completed through reasoning and providing explanations for observed phenomena. This type of method is easier and can be done faster, and does not require developing a hypothesis, consequences, and test cases at all. It is usually used by groups who have a lot of power in a particular domain, or those who do not believe in scientific method for establishing truth.
- Select one of the benefits of using the scientific method, and describe why it is beneficial.
A benefit of the scientific method is that it is objective and unprejudiced. That is, the techniques used to achieve the results should be replicable, so that any individual can repeat the test and similar results will be obtained (Wudka, 1997). This means that individuals do not have to put trust in the given researcher, they can repeat the experiment and determine themselves whether the research is true or false. Through this, the conclusions of the research hold no matter the bias of the individual. This is beneficial because it means that experiments will be repeated by different researchers to determine errors, and if the original claims are not true, then it yields more analysis and study. The scientific method helps to establish verifiable research claims within the scientific community. [“Write my essay for me?” Get help here.]
- When examining an enclosure fire, discuss some of the variables that could influence fire behavior.
There are a few important variables that influence fire behavior in enclosure fires. The first is the fuels available to the fire, rather the area is surrounding by flammable materials, such as wood or fabric, or less flammable materials, such as brick, metal, or plastic (Icove, DeHaan, & Haynes, 2013). Another is the ventilation of the enclosure: if the fire is in a well ventilated enclosure, the fire will be fed by the available oxygen and will continue to grow. In contrast, a fire in a less ventilated room will use up the available oxygen more quickly, resulting in the decay of the fire (Icove, DeHaan, & Haynes, 2013). Another variable is the geometry of the compartment. That is, a larger room with higher ceilings and larger floor areas means that the fire will grow based on its interactions with the materials around it, and in smaller rooms, the fire will also grow to be able to hit the ceiling, which will increase heat transfer throughout the enclosure (Icove, DeHaan, & Haynes, 2013). Finally, the ambient conditions surrounding the fire will result in the fire either growing or shrinking. If the ambient temperature is warmer, it allows for greater heat conduction, and if the temperature is colder, there will be less heat conduction (Icove, DeHaan, & Haynes, 2013).
- Explain how calculating a timeline of fire’s duration in an enclosure can provide the investigator with data needed to make a determination.
The timeline of a fire’s duration can help an investigator determine and analyze the patterns created by the fire, the fire suppression techniques used, the ventilation of the enclosure, and the ambient temperature of the enclosure (Icove, DeHaan, & Haynes, 2013). When the “V” pattern is very wide but short, the fire is of a lower intensity, but when the flames burn longer, the pattern becomes wider and higher (Icove, DeHaan, & Haynes, 2013). By creating a timeline of the duration, investigators can better analyze how the fire was started, and if applicable, who may have started it (if it was an arson) (Icove, DeHaan, & Haynes, 2013). This gives investigators valuable data for making a determination or conviction for a fire investigation. Without knowing the timeline, the investigators would be unable to identify potential causes for the fire, such as ambient temperatures in the middle of the day, or a specific time when a person was free to have started the fire.
- What are the six major motive classifications? Do you think it is possible for an arsonist to display more than one of these motives? If so, give an example.
The six major motive classifications are: vandalism (causing damage to property), excitement (thrill-seeking or attention), revenge (retaliation for an injustice), crime concealment (covering up the scene of another crime, such as a burglary or murder), profit (for material or monetary gain, such as insurance), or extremism (to further religious, political, or social causes) (Icove, DeHaan, & Haynes, 2013). I think it is possible for an arsonist to display multiply motives from this list. For example, an angry arsonist could start a fire as an act of vandalism and revenge on somebody they are upset with, or an angry spouse could start a fire for revenge and to obtain an insurance profit. . [Need an essay writing service? Find help here.]
- Explain how and what oxygen-consumption calorimetry entails and why it is important
Oxygen-consumption calorimetry is used to measure the release of heat from a burning material by measuring how much oxygen is depleted by the gases given off by the fire. A fire that is growing faster and releasing more heat will be using more oxygen. This is important because the rate of heat release from an unwanted fire is a major indication of the threat of the fire to civilian and firefighter life, as well as to property. . < Click Essay Writer to order your essay >
Definition of Peer Review. (2016). Retrieved from The National Academies Press
Icove, D. J., DeHaan, J. D., & Haynes, G. A. (2013). Forensic fire scene reconstruction (3rd ed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Politics & Ideas. (2014, December 2). Conceptual Framework No. 4: Working Hypothesis.
Wudka, J. (1997, September 24). What is the scientific method? Retrieved from University of California Riverside: