Texts
- The Problem of Learning
- Problemistics Courseware
- Corso su Problemistica
- Resources Management
- Manuale/Intellettuale
- Campagna/Città
Problemistics - Problémistique - Problemistica
The Art & Craft of Problem Dealing
Hypothesis
Definition (William James)
Definition (Paul Davidson Reynolds)
Classification (Paul Davidson Reynolds)
Function (W. I. B. Beveridge)
Function (Abraham Kaplan)
Function (Irving M. Copi)
Requirements (Deobold B. Van Dalen)
Requirements (R. Travers)
Requirements (Irving M. Copi)
Features (W. I. B. Beveridge)
Features (Deobold B. Van Dalen)
Features (Stephen F. Barker)
Related concept: Experiment (W. I. B. Beveridge)
Related concept: Experiment (Irving M. Copi)
Related concept: Test (Deobold B. Van Dalen)
Related concept: Theory and Law (Deobold B. Van Dalen)
Related concepts: Theory and Law (Irving M. Copi)
Classical Quotations (Charles Darwin)
[1897] William James, The Will to Believe
"Let us give the name of hypothesis to anything that may be proposed to our belief; and just as the electricians speak of live and dead wires, let us speak of any hypothesis as either live or dead. A live hypothesis is one which appeals as a real possibility to him to whom it is proposed." (§ 1)
[1986, First Edition 1971] Paul Davidson Reynolds, A Primer in Theory Construction
“‘Hypothesis’ is generally used to refer to a statement selected for comparison against data collected in a concrete situation.”
“Because it is to be subjected to empirical test, it is important that all concepts in a hypothesis be measurable, with the proper operational definitions, in concrete situations.” (Chapter 4, p. 78)
[1986, First Edition 1971]Paul Davidson Reynolds, A Primer in Theory Construction
“To summarize, if there is as yet no empirical evidence for or against a statement, it is called a hypothesis; if there is moderate support, it is called an empirical generalization; if the support is ‘overwhelming’ it is called a law.”
But, “since scientists have different standards for evaluating theoretical statements, one man’s law may be another man’s hypothesis.” (Chapter 4, p. 80)
[1957] W. I. B. Beveridge, The Art of Scientific Investigation. Random House, New York, Third Edition
“Hypothesis is the most important mental technique of the investigator, and its
main function is to suggest new experiments and new observations.”
“Hypotheses should be used as tools to uncover new facts rather than as ends in themselves.”
(Chapter 4, p. 63)
[1964] Abraham Kaplan, The Conduct of Inquiry. Methodology for Behavioural Science, Chandler Publishing Company, Scranton, Pennsylvania
Working Hypothesis
“To carry forward an inquiry we may formulate working hypotheses. These serve to guide and organize the investigation, providing us something to go on with.” “It is an idea, not about the outcome of inquiry but about the next steps that may be worth taking. The working hypothesis formulates a belief pertaining to the course of inquiry but not necessarily pertaining to its ultimate destination.” (p. 88)
Test Hypothesis
“After the inquiry is well under way a conjecture or surmise may emerge as to the solution to the problem. We call it the test hypothesis.” (p. 88)
“When the test hypothesis has been established it is said to constitute a fact or a law, according to whether it is particular or general in content.” (p. 89)
[1982, Sixth Edition] Irving M. Copi, Introduction to Logic. Macmillan, New York
“So important is the role of hypothesis in systematic empirical investigation that the formulation and testing of hypotheses can be regarded as the method of science.” (Chapter 12, p. 449)
[1979, First edition 1962] Deobold B. Van Dalen, Understanding Educational Research. An Introduction, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York
“1- Are the hypotheses in agreement with all the known facts and compatible with well-attested theories?
2- Do they explain more facts that are relevant to the problem than any rival hypotheses?
3- Are the hypotheses testable?
4- Are the deduced consequences logically implied by the hypotheses?
5- Are the hypotheses and their deduced consequences expressed in clear, precise terms so that they leave no question about the factors to be tested?
6- Are the hypotheses and their deduced consequences clearly labeled and placed early in the report?
7- Will the hypotheses aid in the prediction of facts and relations that were previously unknown?”
(Chapter 14, p. 436)
[1973] R. Travers in Bennett Neville, Research Design. Open University Press
"It is essential that hypotheses be carefully formulated. Travers ("An Introduction to Educational Research", Macmillan, New York, 1969) suggested five criteria to which they should conform:
1 Hypotheses should be stated clearly and in correct terminology.
2 Hypotheses should be testable.
3 Hypotheses should state relationships between variables.
4 Hypotheses should be limited in scope.
5 Hypotheses should not be inconsistent with most known facts."
(Part 1, Chapter 3, pp. 20-21)
[1982, Sixth Edition] Irving M. Copi, Introduction to Logic. Macmillan, New York
“There are five criteria commonly used in judging the worth or acceptability of hypotheses:
1) Relevance. “[Hypotheses] must be relevant to the fact it is intended to explain, that is the fact in question must be deducible from the proposed hypothesis - either from the hypothesis alone or from it together with certain causal laws which may be presumed to have already been established as highly probable, or from these together with certain assumptions about particular initial conditions.”
2) Testability. “There must be the possibility of making observations that tend to confirm or disprove any scientific hypothesis.”
3) Compatibility with previously well-established hypotheses. “A new theory must fit with older theories if there is to be orderly progress in scientific inquiry.”
“Where there is a conflict between two hypotheses, we must turn to the observable facts to decide between them.” “... the totality of hypotheses accepted at any time should be consistent with each other and - other things being equal - of two new hypotheses, the one which fits in better with the accepted body of scientific theory is to be preferred.”
4) Predictive or explanatory power. “By the predictive or explanatory power of a hypothesis is meant the range of observable facts that can be deduced from it.”
“The greater the predictive power of a hypothesis, the more it explains, and the better it contributes to our understanding of the phenomena with which it is concerned.”
5) Simplicity. If two rival hypotheses satisfy these four criteria equally well, “the simplest theory which fits all the available facts is the one we tend to accept.” (Chapter 13, pp. 473-474)
[1957, Third Edition] W. I. B. Beveridge, The Art of Scientific Investigation. Random House, New York
“When the results of the first experiment or observation fail to support the hypothesis, instead of abandoning it altogether, sometimes the contrary facts are fitted in by a subsidiary clarifying hypothesis. This process of modification may go on till the main hypothesis becomes ridiculously overburdened with ad hoc additions. The point at which this stage is reached is largely a matter of personal judgement or taste. The whole edifice is then broken down and supplanted by another that makes a more acceptable synthesis of all the facts now available.”
(Chapter 4, p. 64)
[1979, First edition 1962] Deobold B. Van Dalen, Understanding Educational Research. An Introduction, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York
“A scientist confirms rather than proves or verifies a hypothesis.”
“Hypotheses are never proved by producing factual evidence that is in harmony with the consequences; they are established only as possessing a degree of probability.“
“... when a wider range of phenomena is examined, some fact related to the problem may turn up that can be explained by a rival hypothesis and not by this hypothesis.”
“From the standpoint of formal logic, you cannot prove that exceptions to your hypothesis will never occur. An investigator does not establish an everlasting truth. You cannot state with 'absolute certainty' that your hypothesis is the only hypothesis that can explain the phenomenon, but you try to come as close to this goal as possible.” (Chapter 8, pp. 207-209)
[1989, First published 1965] Stephen F. Barker, The Elements of Logic, McGraw-Hill, New York
“We should not think that we have to choose between one single hypothesis and another. Instead we should think of the choice as lying between whole sets of hypotheses. If one sets of hypotheses stands out as giving a much more reasonable line of explanation that does any other set, then all the hypotheses of that set are probably true.” (Chapter 7, p. 211)
[1957, Third Edition] W. I. B. Beveridge, The Art of Scientific Investigation. Random House, New York
“Even when confirmed by a number of experiments, the hypothesis has been established as true only for the particular circumstances prevailing in the experiments.”
“A hypothesis which is a generalisation cannot ... be absolutely proved ... but in practice it is accepted if it has withstood a critical testing, especially if it is in accord with general scientific theory.” (Chapter 4, p. 64)
[1982, Sixth Edition] Irving M. Copi, Introduction to Logic. Macmillan, New York
“A successful experiment confirms the hypothesis being tested, rendering it more probable, but never establishes its conclusion with certainty.” (Chapter 12, p. 448)
[1979, First edition 1962] Deobold B. Van Dalen, Understanding Educational Research. An Introduction, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York
“After formulating a hypothesis, an investigator must
(1) deduce its consequences;
(2) select or develop tests that will determine through experiments or sense observations whether these consequences actually occur;
(3) carry out these tests, thereby collecting facts that will either support or not support the hypothesis.”
(Chapter 8, p. 203)
[1979, First edition 1962] Deobold B. Van Dalen, Understanding Educational Research. An Introduction, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York
“Some hypotheses receive sufficient confirmation to become or lead to the formulation of theories; some lead to the establishment of laws. Laws usually utilize highly abstracts concepts, for they offer the most comprehensive type of explanations.” (Chapter 8, p. 222)
[1982, Sixth Edition] Irving M. Copi, Introduction to Logic. Macmillan, New York
“When what was first suggested as a ‘hypothesis’ becomes well confirmed, it is frequently elevated to the position of a ‘theory’. And when on the basis of a great mass of evidence, it achieves well-nigh universal acceptance, it is promoted to the lofty status of a ‘law’. This terminology is not always strictly adhered to: Newton’s discovery is still called the ‘law of gravitation’, whereas Einstein’s contribution, which supersedes or at least improves on Newton’s, is referred to as the ‘theory of relativity’. The vocabulary of ‘hypothesis’, ‘theory’ and ‘law’ is unfortunate since it obscures the important fact that all of the general propositions of science are regarded as hypotheses, never as dogmas.” (Chapter 13, p. 468)
[1983, First published 1876] Charles Darwin, Autobiography. Oxford University Press, Oxford
“I have steadily endeavoured to keep my mind free so as to give up any hypothesis, however much beloved (and I cannot resist forming one on every subject) as soon as facts are shown to be opposed to it. Indeed ... I cannot remember a single first-formed hypothesis which had not after a time to be given up or be greatly modified.” (p. 85)
“An unverified hypothesis is of little or no value; but if anyone should hereafter be led to make observations by which some such hypothesis could be established, I shall have done good service, as an astonishing number of isolated facts can thus be connected together and rendered intelligible.” (p. 78)