Chapter 2

Developing the Research Hypothesis

What you will learn:

1. What is an idea?
2. How to get ideas?
3. Doing a literature search
4. Organization of ideas: laws, theories, research hypotheses
5. What makes good theory?
6. Falsification and Validation
7. Causal and associative relationship
8. Choice of words as choice of weapons
9. The research designs and types of variables
10. Occam’s Razor and shaving off theories.

Having Right Questions and Ideas

Watch a following insert from the movie “Dangerous Method”. Why is the doctor (Carl Jung)
surprised by the observed behavior of the patient?

Note from Chapter 1:

Figure: Steps in the scientific method (from chapter 1)

Developing research ideas

Figure: web tips about how to get ideas

Some great ideas:

Penicillin
http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/
The Facebook
the limit of speed
subconscious mind

Scientists can get ideas for research through the inductive method, the deductive method, or by
looking for limiting conditions or conflicting findings in previous research.

The inductive method, which involves getting ideas by observing specific events, has the potential
of producing new ideas and approaches.

 [Freud’s theory of personality, Piaget’s theory of cognitive development]

The deductive method: using a theory to generate specific ideas that can be tested through
research. It involves getting ideas from existing research or theories, which is useful because the
research will add to the existing literature testing the theory.
Limiting conditions of previous research
 [confounding Gender conformity with Differences in knowledge.]

Conflicting findings
 [social context -> arousal ->amplify dominant (right) response on well
learned task Jogging and Math (Zajonc, 1965)]

Doing a literature search

Once you have begun to develop an idea for your research, you should perform a literature search
to locate the research articles and books that contain reports of previous research.

Conducting a literature search before beginning a research project is essential because it helps
prevent duplication of effort and may help you avoid problems that others have had. The
literature search is also a great time-saver because it can provide you with invaluable information
about how to measure the variables you are interested in and what research designs will be most
useful to you. There is so much literature in behavioral science journals and books that no matter
what your research idea is, others will probably have done something relevant to it. This does not
mean that your idea is not important—in fact, it suggests that others have also found it to be so.

Locating Sources of Information

Probably the most important sources of information are research reports that
contain complete descriptions of the collected data and the data analyses. These research reports
are known as primary sources

To learn the process journal articles go through en route to being published in the scholarly
literature, read through Hartwright’s (2017) brief PowerPoint “What Is a Journal Article?”

Secondary sources are documents that contain only summaries or interpretations of the research
reports rather than a complete
description of them.

Online search: through the databases maintained by university libraries.

Physical search (old fashioned): If the source is not online, you will have to find it on the shelves of
your library using the call number of the book or journal.

You may also wish to use the Web for search:

 scholar.google.com is a reputable source of academic information. Watch the David L. Rice
Library’s (2017) YouTube, “How to Use Google Scholar.”

Assignment #4. Go to the BB/Assignment 04, open the document to see the details.
This assignment must be completed after our library visit. The instructions will be provided at the site.

Questions:

-Ideas can make you _________________ and/or__________________

-What does “limiting conditions” mean when finding ideas? ______________________

Formalizing ideas into Research Hypothesis

Laws. Principles that are so general as to apply to all situations.

Theories. An integrated set of principles that explains and predicts many, but not all, observe
relationships within a given domain of inquire.

Piaget’s theory of cognitive development

Figure: 4 stages of cognitive development by Piaget

Stage Characterized by
Sensori-motor Differentiates self from objects. Recognizes self as agent of action and begins to act
(Birth-2 yrs) intentionally: e.g. pulls a string to set mobile in motion or shakes a rattle to make a
noise
 Achieves object permanence: realizes that things continue to exist even when no longer
present to the sense (pace Bishop Berkeley)
Pre-operational Learns to use language and is able to represent objects by images and words. Thinking is
(2-7 years) still egocentric: has difficulty taking the viewpoint of others
Classifies objects by a single feature: e.g. groups together all the red blocks regardless of
shape or all the square blocks regardless of color
Concrete Can think logically about objects and events. Achieves conservation of number (age 6),
operational mass (age 7), and weight (age 9)
(7-11 years) Classifies objects according to several features and can order them in series along a single
dimension such as size.
Formal operational Can think logically about abstract propositions and test hypotheses systematically.
(11 years and Becomes concerned with the hypothetical, the future, and ideological problems
up)

Components of a good theory:

General
Parsimonious
Provide ides for future research - predictions
Falsifiable

● Good theories are general in the sense that they summarize many different observed
relationships among variables, and parsimonious in the sense that they provide the simplest
possible account of those relationships.
● Good theories also provide ideas for future research by providing specific predictions. Theories
are the fundamental building blocks of science because they provide the basis for the
development of testable research hypotheses.
● A theory is falsifiable if the variables specified can be adequately measured and the predicted
relationship between those variables can be shown to be incorrect. Theories whose variables
cannot be measured, or which are not falsifiable are called tautological. Tautological theories are
not useful because they cannot be falsified.

– Ex. The theory of social reinforcement proposes that people will be more likely to
subsequently perform a behavior after they have been rewarded for performing it. What is
a reward?
def: that which increases the occurrence of behavior…

Theory 1: Any behavior is reinforced by an “external” reward. A reward is objectively observed value
(money, food).
Trying to falsify: can you find any behavior that can’t be reinforced by objectively observed value?
The answer: yes, there is (helping behavior- saving people from a building in fire)
The theory 1 is falsified, that is we showed that is not valid.
To save the idea, the Theory 1.01 is proposed: in addition to external there is also an “internal” reward,
feeling pride, helping motives, etc…
Trying to falsify: can you find any behavior that can’t be reinforced an internal/external reward value?
Conclusions: The theory 1.01 can’t be falsified. You can’t prove it wrong. Any behavior can be explained
either by the external or internal rewards that had reinforced it.

Good consequence: the theory becomes very general.

Bad consequence: there is no way we can test the theory, as you can’t prove it wrong. The tautological
sense is as follows: if a certain external reward can’t explain some behavior, that it is because there was an
“internal” reward. The problem is that I can’t observe these “internal rewards”. If I can’ observe the internal
reward system and directly measure it then the theory is not good. The theory failed on the objectivity
principle.
Final conclusion: Theory 1.01 is not good theory. The theory 1.01 must specify how one can measure the
internal rewards.
 Occam’s Razor: about simplicity principle

First described in the 14th century by William of Ockham, an English Franciscan friar and
philosopher

Used to evaluate the usefulness of a theory

"Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity."

Example of the Occam’s Razor application: Who built the pyramids?

There have been theories that Ancient Astronauts built the Egyptian Pyramids instead of
humans.

For the Alien hypothesis to be true, we'd need the following givens:
▪ 1. aliens exist

▪ 2. they are intelligent

▪ 3. they exist contemporaneously with humans

▪ 4. they develop interstellar/intergalactic travel

▪ 5. they know how to find us

▪ 6. they can build pyramids

▪ 7. they would not leave any evidence of their existence

▪ 8. they would waste time building pyramids.

The alternative Human hypothesis only requires that:

▪ 1. humans exist note

▪ 2. humans can build pyramids

▪ 3. humans would waste time building pyramids.

 Questions:
-How to “screw up” theories?

This is usually done by adding non-measurable variables, properties to explain the phenomena
of interest.

-How to improve theories?

by constantly testing them against data. New theories will replace old and less. In time a theory
will either change so much that it becomes a
new and different theory or be entirely replaced by another, more accurate
theory

Falsifiable theory means that a theory _________________________

Why it is not recommended to create a theory that is very general? _________________________

When a theory becomes an extremely general the theory becomes ____________________

What is the relationship between theory’s generality and parsimony?

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Provide one possible result that will falsify the Piaget’s stages of cognitive development.
_________________________________________________________

What a trick in theory construction will make a theory unfalsifiable?

________________________________________________________________
 Research hypothesis

Hypothesis

hai·paa·thuh·suhs

from Greek, from hupotithenai to propose, suppose, literally: put under; see hypo-, thesis
"base, groundwork, foundation”

A research hypothesis is a specific and falsifiable prediction about the relationship between two or
more variables.

The hypothesis states not only that there is a relationship between the variables, but also the
specific direction of that relationship.

The research hypothesis becomes the basis of correlational and experimental research. Laws or
theories cannot be tested because they are too general and do not specify specific relationships among
variables.

The relationship between variables? We have two types:

1. Causal: A causal relation between two events exists if the occurrence of the first causes
the other. The first event is called the cause and the second event is called the effect
2. Associative: Association is a relationship between two random variables which makes
them statistically dependent. It refers to rather a general relationship without specifics
of the relationship being mentioned, and it is not necessary to be a
causal relationship.
Example: what is a true relationship between smoking and cancer?

Analyze the wordings on internet about the relationship between the two, when reported in various
sources. What is your conclusion?
Analyze possible experimental research design. What is your conclusion.

Questions:

-Which ingredients make a research hypothesis?

_____________________________________________________

-Define a research hypothesis in general

________________________________________________________

-If a correlational design is used what is the conventional name for the variables?

-If an experimental design is used what is the conventional name for the variables?

-Which type of relationship people like to learn about?

-How do we identify the causal relationship in everyday language?

Causal and associative relationship in everyday life:

When describing how things occur in our environment we usually think in causal terms.

Which word(s) can be used to express causal relation in modern English?

When there is certainty about some relationships between variables.

Examples: He gave me the chills.

I had a wild dream.
Someone stole my chocolate bar…

Linguistics and Transition Words: Causation & Sequence

Which word(s) can be used to express associative relation in modern English?

Usually when there is uncertainty involved between the variables.

Examples: No health coverage tied to 45,000 deaths a year.

 It is likely that she will be happy.

Analysis of media: http://www.statlit.org/pdf/2009SchieldRaymondASA.pdf

Causal and associative relationship in science:

In the scientific reports, how do we determine which terms to use?

Answer: it depends on the research design!

Scientific reports may use the following terms:

(a) Association terms: X and Y are associated, connected, related, relationship, imply, may affect,
may influence, correlated, predicts
(b) Causal terms: X will cause changes in Y, X will cause Y, X directly affects Y, affects, influences,
leads to.

Assignment #5. Go to the BB/Assignment 05, open the document to see the details.

Questions:
- Which term describes the relationship between variables that are more scientific: associative or
causal?
- How should we identify the relationship type from the description?
- How should we identify the type of research design from the description?
- Related to the relationship terms, what is very important to have in mind in scientific reports?
Make the comparison to everyday life statements.

Choice of words as choice of weapons

To be statistically literate, one must be able to read and interpret the titles and headlines of stories in
the everyday media. Doing so is not easy when the headlines use words that statistically illiterate
readers read as asserting causation

While reading some report you could be easily swayed by a name of the institution that is attached,
award level, amount of money, duration of a project, celebrity name added, familiarity…. Try to
debias yourself.

Assignment #6. Go to the BB/Assignment 06, open the document to see the details.
 Critical Test: The flu shot dilemma.

Parents dilemma: Two siblings: 5 (son) and 2 (daughter) year old. Parents forgot about the
appointment and it happened that only the younger sibling (daughter) received a flu shot.
• After two months the older sibling (son) got the flu and had high temperature of 104 degrees,
for several nights.
• A week after, the younger sibling (daughter) got the flue, with the similar symptoms.
• What should the parents strongly conclude about the relationship between flu shots and health
from the case?

Take home messages:

o Get an idea!
– inductive method,
– the deductive method
– looking for limiting conditions
– conflicting findings in previous research.
o Organizing Principles
❖ Law

❖ Theory

• General
• Parsimonious
• Provide ides for future research - predictions
• Falsifiable

❖ Research hypothesis – testable!!!