Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
while we learn from facts and use them to develop theories. But we need initial
theories to help us search for facts.
Thus confirmation, falsification, and other descriptions of method help to shape
research questions as well as research processes, and contribute to the practice of sci-
ence.We need to be willing to abandon theories in the face of contradictions, but flexi-
ble in response to failure; contradictions may be due to an incorrect hypothesis, faulty
experimental apparatus, or poormeasurement of the experimental outcomes.We need
to be ready to seek plausible alternative explanations of facts or observations, and to
find experiments that yield observations that provide insight into theories. That is,
theories and evidence are deeply intertwined. A scientific method that gives one pri-
macy over the other is unlikely to be productive, and, to have high impact, our research
programs should be designed so that theory and evidence reinforce each other.
A “Hypotheses, Questions, and Evidence” Checklist
Regarding
hypotheses and questions
,
What phenomena or properties are being investigated? Why are they of interest?
Has the aim of the research been articulated? What are the specific hypotheses and
research questions? Are these elements convincingly connected to each other?
To what extent is the work innovative? Is this reflected in the claims?
What would disprove the hypothesis? Does it have any improbable consequences?
What are the underlying assumptions? Are they sensible?
Has the work been critically questioned? Have you satisfied yourself that it is
sound science?
Regarding
evidence and measurement
,
What forms of evidence are to be used? If it is a model or a simulation, what
demonstrates that the results have practical validity?
How is the evidence to be measured? Are the chosen methods of measurement
objective, appropriate, and reasonable?
What are the qualitative aims, and what makes the quantitative measures you have
chosen appropriate to those aims?
What compromises or simplifications are inherent in your choice of measure?
Will the outcomes be predictive?
What is the argument that will link the evidence to the hypothesis?
To what extent will positive results persuasively confirm the hypothesis? Will
negative results disprove it?
What are the likely weaknesses of or limitations to your approach?
