Which term refers to the discussion and comparison of findings between two researchers?

The term that accurately refers to the discussion and comparison of findings between two researchers is inter-observer reliability. This concept is essential in research, particularly in psychological studies, as it relates to the consistency and agreement between different observers or researchers when they assess, code, or interpret data.

When researchers work with subjective measurements, establishing inter-observer reliability ensures that their findings are not based on individual bias but rather reflect a consensus. This reliability is typically quantified by calculating the degree of agreement between observers, making it a fundamental aspect of validating research methods and outcomes.

In contrast, peer review relates to the evaluation process that research articles undergo before publication, focusing on quality and credibility rather than direct discussion between researchers. Variable analysis involves examining the relationships or effects regarding different variables within a study, while control effects deal with managing extraneous variables to ensure any observed effects can be attributed to the experimental treatments. Thus, inter-observer reliability stands out as the appropriate term that reflects the collaboration and comparison between researchers specifically in the context of their findings.