Sie sind auf Seite 1von 12

Hypothetico-Deductive

Model
The hypothetico-deductive model or method is a proposed description of
scientific method. According to it, scientific inquiry proceeds by formulating
a hypothesis in a form that can be falsifiable, using a test on observable data
where the outcome is not yet known. A test outcome that could have and does
run contrary to predictions of the hypothesis is taken as a falsification of the
hypothesis. A test outcome that could have, but does not run contrary to the
hypothesis corroborates the theory. It is then proposed to compare the
explanatory value of competing hypotheses by testing how stringently they
are corroborated by their predictions.

Example
One example of an algorithmic statement of the hypothetico-deductive
method is as follows:

1. Use your experience: Consider the problem and try to make sense of it.
Gather data and look for previous explanations. If this is a new problem to
you, then move to step 2.
2. Form a conjecture (hypothesis): When nothing else is yet known, try to
state an explanation, to someone else, or to your notebook.

3. Deduce predictions from the hypothesis: if you assume 2 is true, what


consequences follow?

4. Test (or experiment): Look for evidence (observations) that conflict with
these predictions in order to disprove 2. It is a logical error to seek 3 directly
as proof of 2. This formal fallacy is called affirming the consequent.

One possible sequence in this model would be 1, 2, 3, 4. If the outcome of 4


holds, and 3 is not yet disproven, you may continue with 3, 4, 1, and so forth;
but if the outcome of 4 shows 3 to be false, you will have to go back to 2 and
try to invent a new 2, deduce a new 3, look for 4, and so forth.

Note that this method can never absolutely verify (prove the truth of) 2. It can
only falsify 2. (This is what Einstein meant when he said, "No amount of
experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me
wrong."

Discussion
Additionally, as pointed out by Carl Hempel (1905–1997), this simple view
of the scientific method is incomplete; a conjecture can also incorporate
probabilities, e.g., the drug is effective about 70% of the time.[5] Tests, in
this case, must be repeated to substantiate the conjecture (in particular, the
probabilities). In this and other cases, we can quantify a probability for our
confidence in the conjecture itself and then apply a Bayesian analysis, with
each experimental result shifting the probability either up or down. Bayes'
theorem shows that the probability will never reach exactly 0 or 100% (no
absolute certainty in either direction), but it can still get very close to either
extreme. See also confirmation holism.

Qualification of corroborating evidence is sometimes raised as


philosophically problematic. The raven paradox is a famous example. The
hypothesis that 'all ravens are black' would appear to be corroborated by
observations of only black ravens. However, 'all ravens are black' is logically
equivalent to 'all non-black things are non-ravens' (this is the contraposition
form of the original implication). 'This is a green tree' is an observation of a
non-black thing that is a non-raven and therefore corroborates 'all non-black
things are non-ravens'. It appears to follow that the observation 'this is a green
tree' is corroborating evidence for the hypothesis 'all ravens are black'.
Attempted resolutions may distinguish:

 non-falsifying observations as to strong, moderate, or weak


corroborations
 investigations that do or do not provide a potentially falsifying test of
the hypothesis
Evidence contrary to a hypothesis is itself philosophically problematic. Such
evidence is called a falsification of the hypothesis. However, under the theory
of confirmation holism it is always possible to save a given hypothesis from
falsification. This is so because any falsifying observation is embedded in a
theoretical background, which can be modified in order to save the
hypothesis. Popper acknowledged this but maintained that a critical approach
respecting methodological rules that avoided such immunizing stratagems is
conducive to the progress of science
The hypothetico-deductive model (or
approach) versus other research models
The hypothetico-deductive approach contrasts with other research models
such as the inductive approach or grounded theory. In the data percolation
methodology, the hypothetico-deductive approach is included in a paradigm
of pragmatism by which four types of relations between the variables can
exist: descriptive, of influence, longitudinal or causal. The variables are
classified in two groups, structural and functional, a classification that drives
the formulation of hypotheses and the statistical tests to be performed on the
data so as to increase the efficiency of the research.

Introduction
Science is based on many different pillars that combine to provide the
methods of reasoning, logic, and ethics to conduct research. Based on the
research methods the foundation of all the research is scientific reasoning. It
varies with different nature of disciplines and based on four basic foundations
pulling together the idea of scientific reasoning.

The initial basis of research is the foundation. It is a natural phenomenon for


a researcher to start looking for a solution based on scientific questions and
hypotheses. The theories observations will be tested against the data collected
through observations.

The possible reasons behind any phenomenon are based on law of nature.
There are several different scientific reasoning processes to find out a
solution for a research problem through hypothesis. The theory is broken
down into small different parts or problems to find out a valid hypothesis
The results are needed to be predicted for the research based on the outcome
of the experiment. Most of the time based on the alternative hypothesis. The
predictions of the theory are tested rather than theory to find out if the
predictions are incorrect. Depending on the results theory, is accepted or
refined. The applied part of research is data that is important to conduct
research in the real world against the observations and predictions. If the
results of both observation and prediction matches, the theory is
strengthened. A wide range of statistical methods are used to conduct the test,
but not all the disciplines use statistics (Haberman, 2011).

The process of scientific reasoning cycles until the results are accepted or
refuted according to the hypothesis.

LITERATURE REVIEW
It is the mainstreams of the scientific research and often knows as true
scientific research method. The method involves a number of steps for
observing the subject. It allows the researcher to make a testable and realistic
hypothesis. A hypothesis cannot be confirmed entirely by the scientific
methods, and refined research can disprove it on later stages [2]. The
researcher must generate initial predictions from the hypothesis that can be
proved on the later stages. The predictions can be tested to be a valid process
through the hypothetico-deductive method.

2.1 Generating and Analysis the Data


The experiments are performed to gather the statistical result to test the
validity of the hypothesis. It must have manipulation of the variables to
generate the analyzable data. The hypothetico-deductive method does not
prove the hypothesis completely, and it is rare when it is done.
2.2 Falsifiability
It is defined as the inherent testability of any scientific hypothesis.
Experiments are designed to find out the validity of any hypothesis, and it is a
belief in any hypothesis that it must be inherently disprovable before it is
accepted as a theory or scientific hypothesis. It is based on a simple idea that
no theory can be correct, and if it is not deniable then it is accepted as truth.
The acceptance is dependent on the significance.

2.3 Verification Error


It is a process of fitting the results to match the preconceived theory.
Sometimes the results are based on personal understanding of the subject
matter. There is a growing trend of verification error in scientific research. It
is a belief that all the scientific statements must be verifiable and should
make sense to be worth researching. This concept is called verificationism. It
is rooted to the Aristotelian philosophy of what is known can only be tested

2.4 Testability
The inherent testability for obtaining proof of a hypothesis is the concept of
testability. The growing technology has attacked the theories that were
discovered in the history claiming to be non-testable and non-falsifiable. A
part of the theory must be testable and analyzable with the current technology

2.5 Post Hoc Reasoning


It is theory that one event is based on another event and follows each other. It
can be true in some case but not all the time. It is linking factors with each
other to know the reason behind occurring of events. Science is always
looking for possible causes and causal reasoning to judge the quality of
information for a reasonable hypothesis
3. STEPS OF HYPOTHETICO
DEDUCTIVE METHOD
Following are the steps involved:
1. Identifying the broad problem area in which main problem is occurring to
do a research project.
2. Defining the problem statement. It can be the scientific research with
definite aim and general objective of the research.
3. Development of hypothesis which should be testable and falsifiable.
4. Measuring the theoretical framework and if it not measurable then it
should be qualitative.
5. Collection of data is based on quantitative and qualitative data.
6. Analysis of data is done to check if the hypotheses generated were
supported.
7. Interpreting data for finding out the meaning of the results.
4. UTILIZATION OF
HYPOTHETICO DEDUCTIVE
METHOD
According to Lewis, “This erroneous view of the method plus the absence of
a proper definition of theory misguide my early development in science” (p.
362). The sciences like biology, physics, geology and chemistry all are based
on the hypothetico-deductive method. Many of the teachers and authors
misguide their students about the subject basic methodology. The theory can
be explained with the examples in the different subject matter like if the light
travels in concentric waves then the light should pass through the slits. The
experiment which was conducted showed that light passed through both of
the slits and created a third pattern screen of both bands (expected result) and
therefore it supports the alternative hypothesis that light travels in concentric
waves (conclusion). In the same way, the method can be used in all different
subject matters for finding out the conclusions, experiments, hypothesis, and
results ----The hypothetico-deductive methods confirm a theory when the
prediction and observation gap is small and disconfirms when the gap is large
[5]. Most of the focus in the scientific methodology is to reduce the gap
between the predictions and observations. It is an essential component of the
hypothetico-deductive method [6,7,8]. The hypothetico-deductive method
tests the empirical hypothesis and theories well and widely used by the
scientists. [6] writes, “Despite the inability of the hypothetico-deductive
accounts to explain evidential relevance,…[it] remains today one of the most
popular. The reason, I think, is that it is so obviously the correct account of a
great deal of the history of science.” (p. 47-48). Many of the psychologists
have also adopted the method and example can be facial inversion effect that
related to the observation of inverted faces.
Different research authors have used hypotheticodeductive method with
different research aims. used the method to test the hypothesis for employee
turnover and performance of firm to have an reverse U shaped relationship,
mainly low turnover or high turnover. The data was analyzed of 110 offices
offering temporary employment and found the hypothesised curvilinerar
relationship. used the method to identify the categories of decisions
misunderstood in general decisions. A series of interviews were conducted
with the end customers to find out the categories of misunderstanding. The
categories emerged as a result of implication of data and based on the fact
that once they have occurred and might occur again. used the methodology
to investigate the impact of equality or balance during merging process of an
organization. The researchers used case study of failed international mergers.
They found out that the principle of equality has reverse effect on the social
integration influencing it in negatively opposite to the predictions in
literature. used the methodology to investigate the relationship between the
managerial level and personality. A personality test was conducted to find out
the relationship between the results and the managerial level. Four different
hypothesis were derived based on the positive or negative relation with the
managerial level. used the methodology in the banking sector to filter the
data related to a particular story from another. The banking sector involves a
vast area of research including social, economic and political factors
combined together in one organizational context.
The hypotheticodeductive method overlooks this challenge of incorporating
the subjective and social consequences values. It reduces the link between the
prediction, technical and explanation control. used the hypothetico-deductive
method to the early theories of blood flow and William Harvey’s research.
The theory was based on the hypothetico-deductive reasoning for the
experiments of blood flow directions in a human body. The test was also
conducted on the septum holes. The results according to the H-D method was
that Galen’s theory was not supported
5. SIMILARITIES AND
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE
APPROACHES
All the researchers who have implemented the methodology in real time have
used the basic core steps of the H-D method. The researchers first analyzed
the broad are of the main problem. Broad area was the organization
performance, problem area was influence on decisions, was on equality steps
taken by any organization in mergers, problem domain was the attitude of
managers, broad area was the banking sector improvement and domain was
the field of biology. For second step all the researchers have further narrowed
the research such as problem was narrowed to the employee turnover and
performance.
The third step of the H-D method is the problem statement for which all of
the researchers have made different hypothesis to be tested with the H-D
method. The measurement of the framework is the basic difference some of
the authors have used interviews, others have used data collected through
surveys, collection through blood samples, collection through social
integration. This difference is dependent on the main problem domain of the
H-D algorithm as it does not support the social integration properly. The data
is then tested against the hypothesis during the process to check the rejection
or acceptance.
The another important step in the H-D method is the interpretation which has
been used different by each of the researchers and according to psychology, it
depends on the human nature and environment in which the results are
conducted. The interpretation of the results can be different with one same
experiment conducted by two different people. The references to the
conclusion of results must be strong enough to define the actual result which
is same as p-o gap.
6. HYPOTHETICO-DEDUCTIVE
METHOD: RESEARCH AREA
IMPROVEMENTS
Methods are not always perfect. They require other knowledge to be
combined with the other resources to produce the background theory, logical
improvements, probability theory and hypothesis to determine the acceptance
and rejection of a hypothesis model. The model is based on confirming the
entire theory and cannot distinguish between different parts of the theory for
acceptance. It does not completely explains the scientific research and
structure of the scientific paper reports. The fundamental component that
requires improvement is the prediction-observing (po) component that is
limited to the model extent. The gap between the p-o components cannot be
decreased, but its limit can be increased to fulfill the decreasing demand. The
p-o gap cannot be increased infinitely without any limits as the model has to
qualify the statement of within limits: Another model can be derived such as
Reduction Model that can attempt to decrease the gap according to the
domain model. The experiments will be different for each of the domain
models to get the accurate results. The rule which can be derived on the
above given analysis is that H-D method still needs a lot of improvement and
a single hypothesis should have enough data in order to be rejected or
accepted. Also the data should be validated by different persons or a
committee led by group of people strong in interpreting statistical results.
Another important step which should be added as a rule in conducting the H-
D method is to obtain a prefeasibility of a research domain to check that
whether H-D method is applicable or not applicable for a specific domain.
The domain limitations must be considered in order to get the proper results.
The rules are important to avoid collection of ambiguous data and selecting a
methodology which suits the problem domain.
7. FUTURE WORK AND CONCLUSION
The hypothetico-deductive model is one of the models used for the scientific
reasoning and research. The model is used for generating the basic
experiments for validation of the hypothesis in different scientific research
domains. However, it is not the only model that is used for the research
conclusions. It is combined further with the deductive reasoning, inductive
reasoning, casual reasoning, abductive reasoning and defeasible reasoning.
These models are widely used in contrast with the hypotheticodeductive
model for finding out the scientific solution of the research. Further analysis
is required in each of the scientific reasoning domains to analyze the correct
approach for finding out accurate results and decreasing the prediction-
observation gap.