Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The hypothetico-deductive model or method is a proposed description of the 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 ...
In this classification, a deductive-nomological (D-N) explanation of an occurrence is a valid deduction whose conclusion states that the outcome to be explained did in fact occur. The deductive argument is called an explanation, its premisses are called the explanans (L: explaining) and the conclusion is called the explanandum (L: to be explained).
A central method was the [1] examination of functional relations between environment and behavior, as opposed to hypothetico-deductive learning theory [2] that had grown up in the comparative psychology of the 1920–1950 period. Skinner's approach was characterized by observation of measurable behavior which could be predicted and controlled.
DN model and IS model—whereby the probability must be high, such as at least 50% [31] —together form covering law model, [6] as named by a critic, William Dray. [32] Derivation of statistical laws from other statistical laws goes to the deductive-statistical model (DS model).
Predictions (inductive and deductive reasoning from the hypothesis or theory) Experiments (tests of all of the above) Each element of the scientific method is subject to peer review for possible mistakes. These activities do not describe all that scientists do but apply mostly to experimental sciences (e.g., physics, chemistry, biology, and ...
The methodology contrasts with the hypothetico-deductive model used in traditional scientific research. A study based on grounded theory is likely to begin with a question, or even just with the collection of qualitative data. As researchers review the data collected, ideas or concepts become apparent to the researchers.
The latter provides refinements to the hypothetico-deductive account of confirmation, arguing that a piece of evidence may be confirmationally relevant only to some content parts of a hypothesis. A third critic is Elliott Sober (2004). [9] He considers likelihood comparisons and model selection ideas.
The process by which a subject is proposed to go about forming such rules or hypothesis has been the topic of formal probabilistic modeling, a discussion of which can be found in the references.