Theories in Natural science are constructed to explain, predict, and master phenomena. They must be empirically testable or lead to retro dictions that are testable. This is extensively know as the scientific method. The scientific method is one reason is that we put our confidence in scientists. To yield and to develop their theories and conclusions.
It must also be accepted by the scientific community. 3. What document offers an alternative to the Frye standard that some courts believe espouses a more flexible standard for admitting scientific evidence? The document would be The Daubert Case. It must be scientifically tested by the peers and the peers must also review it.
2. Developing Hypotheses: Scientific inquiry moves forward when ideas can be tested. Your first step is to develop a hypothesis. A hypothesis is a possible answer to a scientific question or an explanation for a set of observations. Your hypothesis is not a fact.
This is definitely unethical. When more than a minor medical issue arises, the ethical thing for the physician assistant to do is take the patient to a practical setting and take the normal course of actions (2013). Joe is breaking this by taking kits out of the practice area into his own home without consent of the physician or the facility as a whole. The guidelines go over the importance of not providing informal care, which is exactly what Joe is doing in this situation. He is not only informally treating and collecting specimen from his daughter, but he is also not documenting any of the treatments that he is doing.
The control group and experimental group will be compared to see if there is a statically significant difference. If there is a difference, it is due to the independent variable and the hypothesis has been proven correct or incorrect, depending on what the results show. At the end of an experiment, the study will be written up according to APA standards and will be submitted for peer review. By publishing the study other psychologists may replicate it. If the same results are found again, credibility will be added to the study.
This leaves the possibility that one of the test subjects not included in the sample could prove the conclusion to be incorrect. In other words, induction involves moving “from premises about objects we have examined to a conclusion about objects we haven’t examined” (Okasha, 2002, p. 19). From this statement it is apparent how induction can be a problem in science due to it’s potential to lead to a false conclusion. Another problem with induction in scientific reasoning is that induction only generalizes what has already occurred. It classifies patterns that have already happened and deems them to be true even though future occurrences may be uncertain.
Quantitative Versus Qualitative Essay Eva Hutchens Texas A&M University – Central Texas Quantitative Versus Qualitative Essay When conducting research using a quantitative method the author will identify a research problem based on current trends in a particular field of study. Researching a trend usually implies that the author will conduct a study to find out an overall tendency in people and how those tendencies vary among individuals. Also, in some quantitative studies it may be needed that the researcher explains how one variable affects another variable (Creswell, 2012, p.13). When using a qualitative approach to research it is usually because the variables are not known and there is a need to explore the research problem further. The qualitative research seeks to explore a problem and develop a thorough understanding of the central research problem (Creswell, 2012, p. 16).
Unlike in a field experiment where the participants are completely unaware that they are being observed so it gives more of a natural response, this allows the researchers to gain results with greater validity. In a laboratory experiment, the researchers have to tell the percipients the reasons for the experiment to allow the percipients to give full consent this is due to the ethical reasons such as if the person doesn’t agree due to religion/beliefs, ethnicity ect. Where as, the percipients of a field experiment have to be unaware of the reasons for the research to allow a higher rate of natural answers. This means that field experiments are less ethically agreed with. An example of a laboratory experiment is Asch (a psychologist) who tested the rate of conformity within groups.
This demarcating of science is a definite way to distinguish the difference between true science and pseudo-science. Before diving into the details of the criterion of demarcation, it is crucial to first understand the significance of demarcating science. In the simplest of reasoning, science is a study based on factuality (it is important to point out that scientific conclusions are however not based on absolute certainty, something I will touch on later). There is a specific process and order in which scientific experiments are conducted, the scientific method, and conclusions are gathered based on very tedious and detail-oriented procedures. That is one of the main reasons why that which is labeled a “science” has a certain level of credibility attached to it.
There are four main goals: to describe, explain, predict and change behavior and mental processes through the use of scientific methods. These goals were set to help psychologists to better understand what factors cause different types of behavior, and are also a thorough way to identify ... ” individuals can decrease the likelihood of a behavior by learning about the conditions that may send them into a predicament. One may think that the problem is solved, but there is still the matter of trying to treat the condition. Finally, we get to the point where we can find out 'how' to alter behavior. It is important to the individual to obtain a typical lifestyle.