I think my results are reliable enough to support a firm conclusion because my method was quite accurate, and how I performed the experiment was excellent; I got the same results in my preliminary and my final set. And if my method was inaccurate it would have been the same inaccuracy for all separate tests mean I don?t really agree that my method needs criticizing or moderating seeing as it was accurate enough for my level of work, if I were a scientist and I had access to better apparatus I may moderate or criticize my method in the following way:
I don?t think there was a large enough range of results taken, it would have been useful (when plotted) to test reaction rate whilst varying concentration of HCL. It would be interesting to see if it showed the same pattern of results as my thiosulphate did. If there was a larger range of results then I could have thoroughly observed and different patterns to ones I got. Perhaps I should have got a meter rule and made sure my head was always at the same height, this is because as your height increases away from the beaker the cross becomes less visible, which means you stop timing a little earlier.