0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views32 pages

Unit 2 - The Scientific Approach

This document discusses research methods and the scientific approach. It describes various sources of knowledge including experience, authority, tradition, and the scientific approach. The scientific approach involves systematically defining a problem, stating hypotheses, using deductive reasoning to determine implications, collecting and analyzing data, and confirming or rejecting hypotheses based on the evidence. The scientific attitude emphasizes skepticism, objectivity, focusing on facts rather than values, and seeking to integrate findings into testable theories.

Uploaded by

Íts Hyp Ër
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views32 pages

Unit 2 - The Scientific Approach

This document discusses research methods and the scientific approach. It describes various sources of knowledge including experience, authority, tradition, and the scientific approach. The scientific approach involves systematically defining a problem, stating hypotheses, using deductive reasoning to determine implications, collecting and analyzing data, and confirming or rejecting hypotheses based on the evidence. The scientific attitude emphasizes skepticism, objectivity, focusing on facts rather than values, and seeking to integrate findings into testable theories.

Uploaded by

Íts Hyp Ër
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 32

Research Methods

HRD 312/BBA312
Unit 2: The Scientific approach
OBJECTIVES
• By the end of this unit, students should
be able to:
– Explain strengths and weaknesses of
various sources knowledge
– Describe and use the scientific approach
– Describe the role of theory in research
Sources of Knowledge
• There are several sources of knowledge which
scientists and professionals turn to for making
decisions in their specialized disciplines.
• As a professional, it is assumed that we have
the knowledge and skills necessary to make
valid decisions about what to do and how to
do it.
• To do this we have to turn to reliable sources
of knowledge and skills.
Sources of Knowledge
• Sources of knowledge include:
– Experience,
– Authority,
– Tradition and
– The scientific approach
EXPERIENCE

• Personal experience provides most answers to


many of the questions one faces.
• Most of the wisdom passed from generation
to generation is a result of experience
• The ability to learn from experience is in fact
considered a major characteristic of intelligent
behavior.
LIMITATIONS OF EXPERIENCE

• People perceive things differently. Two people


observing a staff meeting can truthfully compile
very different reports if one focused on what went
right and the other on what went wrong in the
meeting.

• Some things cannot be effectively learned by
experience alone. A child might figure out the
technique of addition but unlikely to figure out an
efficient way to compute square roots.
AUTHORITY

• For those things that are difficult or impossible


to know by personal experience, we frequently
turn to authority.
• We turn to someone with experience on the
problem or one who has some other source of
expertise.
• We accept as truth the knowledge of these
recognized as authorities.
• For example, we turn to lawyers on legal issues.
AUTHORITY
• Although this is a good source of knowledge, one
question still remains: How does authority know?
• Historically, authority was assumed to be right simply
by the position or rank they held e.g. king, chief, clergy.
• Today , we are reluctant to rely on authority by
position held in society.
• We are inclined to accept the assumptions of an
authority when that authority bases its assumptions
on experience and other reliable sources of
knowledge.
TRADITION

• Closely related to authority tradition.


• When one asks, “how has something been
done in the past?”
• Many of such traditions have however been
proven erroneous and been rejected.
THE SCIENTIFIC APPROACH

• The scientific approach is a process in which


investigators move inductively from their
observations to hypotheses and then
deductively from hypotheses to the logical
implications of those hypotheses.
Deductive Reasoning

• It is a thinking process in which one proceeds


from general to specific statements using
prescribed rules of logic.
• It is a system of organizing known facts in order
to reach a conclusion using logical arguments.
• An argument being a set of statements standing
in relation to one another with the final
statement as a conclusion and the rest called
premises and comprising supporting evidence.
Deductive Reasoning

• Example
– All students at University of Lilongwe are
intelligent people
– Mary is a student at University of Lilongwe
– Therefore, Mary is an intelligent person
• If the premises are true, then the conclusion is
essentially true.
Limitations of deductive reasoning

• You must begin with true premises in order to arrive at


true conclusions. Conclusions of a syllogism can never
exceed the content of the premises.
• The scientific approach cannot be conducted through
deductive reasoning alone because of the difficulty in
establishing the universal truth of many statements
dealing with scientific phenomena.
• Its strength however lies in the ability to link theory to
observations. Deductions from theory provide
hypotheses which should be observed in scientific
enquiry.
Inductive reasoning

• Francis Bacon (1560 –1626) is the one to have


first called for this approach.
• His contention was that “we should not tie
ourselves to accepting premises handed over
by authority as absolute truth.
• He argued that investigators should establish
general conclusions on the basis of facts
gathered through direct observation.
Inductive vs Deductive Reasoning
• Inductive reasoning differs from deductive
reasoning in that in deductive reasoning:
– The premises must be known before a conclusion is
reached while in inductive reasoning, the conclusion
is reached by observing examples and then making
generalizations from the examples to the whole class.
– In order to be absolutely certain of an inductive
conclusion, the investigator must observe all cases in
the class and this is referred to as PERFECT
INDUCTION.
Inductive vs Deductive Reasoning
• DEDUCTIVE REASONING:
– Every mammal is warm blooded.
– Goats are mammals
– Therefore, every goat is warm blooded.
• INDUCTIVE REASONING:
– Every goat that has ever been observed is warm
blooded.
– Therefore, every goat is warm blooded.
Inductive vs Deductive Reasoning
• Exclusive use of the induction results in accumulation of
isolated pieces of knowledge and information and hence make
little contribution to the advancement of knowledge.
• Many problems can not be solved by induction only, hence the
integration of induction and deduction into the scientific
approach.
• The use of hypotheses makes a major difference between
inductive reasoning and the scientific approach.
• The scientific approach follows a series of steps to be followed
systematically.
• It is a systematic process of inquiry involving interdependent
parts.
The Scientific Approach
• Definition of the problem
• Statement of hypotheses or research
questions
• Deductive reasoning
• Collection and analysis of data
• Confirmation or rejection of hypotheses
DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM

• A scientific investigation originates from a problem or a


question to be solved.
• The problem must satisfy certain characteristics
• It must be possible to formulate it in such a way that
observation or experimentation can provide an answer.
• Issues of choice and value cannot be investigated on the
basis of factual information alone.
• Concepts such as good cannot measured.
• Value judgements are out of place in science.
• Words that imply value judgment should be avoided in
problem definition.
STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS OR RESEACH QUESTION

• The next step is formulation of hypothesis.


• Hypothesis provides a tentative explanation
of the problem.
• This requires review of related literature and
much further thought.
DEDUCTIVE REASONING

• Through deductive reasoning, the implication


of the suggested hypothesis i.e. what is
supposed to be observed if the hypothesis is
true is determined.
COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

• The hypothesis or more precisely, the deduced


implication of the hypothesis is tested by
collecting data through observation, testing
and experimentation.
CONFIRMATION OR REJECTION OF THE HYPOTHESIS

• Once data is collected, it is analyzed in order


to determine whether the investigation has
produced evidence that supports the
hypothesis.
• In scientific approach, one does not claim to
prove the hypothesis because that would be
dealing with absolute truth.
• One can only conclude that the evidence
supports or fails to support the hypothesis.
ASSUMPTIONS MADE BY SCIENTISTS
• Events they investigate are lawful or ordered.
No event is capricious.
– Science is based on the belief that all natural
phenomena have antecedent factors.
– This is referred to as universal determinism.
• Truth can ultimately be derived from direct
observation.
– Reliance upon empirical observation differentiates
science from non science.
ATTITUDES OF SCIENTISTS

• Doubters:
• Scientists maintain a highly skeptical attitude
towards data of science.
• Findings are regarded as tentative and are not
accepted unless they can be verified.
• Other investigators must be able to repeat the
observations and obtain the same results.
• Hence need to make testing procedures known to
others in order that they may verify or fail to verify
your findings.
ATTITUDES OF SCIENTISTS

• Objective and impartial:


– Scientists are impartial and objective
– They do not try to prove a point in conducting
observations
– They seek truth and accept the facts even when
they are contrary to their own opinions.
ATTITUDES OF SCIENTISTS

• Facts not values:


– Scientists do not indicate any potential moral
implications of their findings.
– They do not make decisions for us about what is
good or bad.
– They provide data concerning relationships that
exist between events.
– But we must go beyond the scientific data if we
want to make decisions about whether or not
certain consequences are desirable.
ATTITUDES OF SCIENTISTS

• Seek to integrate and systematize their


findings:
– Scientists want to put the things which are known
into an orderly system.
– They aim for theories that attempt to bring
together empirical evidence into a meaningful
pattern.
– They however regard these theories as tentative
subject to revision as new evidence is found.
THEORY

• The purpose of theory is to integrate, organize


and classify facts gathered through empirical
investigation in order to make isolated findings
meaningful and identify significant relationships.
• A theory is therefore a set of interrelated
constructs (concepts), definitions and
propositions that present a systematic view of
phenomena by specifying relations among
variables with the purpose of explaining and
predicting phenomena.
THEORY
• The ultimate goal of science is theory
formulation.
• Theory provides a provisional explanation of
observed events and relationships.
• It stimulates the development of new
knowledge by providing leads for further
enquiry.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THEORY

• Theory should explain the observed facts relating to a


particular problem.
– It should provide explanation concerning the phenomena.
– The explanations should be as simple as possible.
• Theory should be consistent with observed facts and with
already established knowledge.
• Theory should provide means for its verification.
– This is normally done by making deductions mainly through
hypothesis stating the consequences expected to be observed
if the theory is true.
• .
CHARACTERISTICS OF THEORY

• It is inappropriate to speak of truth or falsity.


• Its utility determines its acceptance or
rejection i.e.
– How efficiently it leads to predictions concerning
observable consequences.
• These consequences are confirmed when
empirical data are collected.
• Theory should stimulate new discoveries and
indicate areas in need of further investigation

You might also like