Popper believes while a science is set up to challenge its claims and look for evidence that might prove it false, a pseudo-science is set up to look for evidence that supports its claims. In general, science seeks falsifications and it is testable but pseudo-science seeks
The two had a problem with the beginning stages of Popper’s composition of scientific testing. Duhem introduces auxiliary assumptions that are necessary to make a hypothesis. He states that in order to make a hypothesis, there are many other assumptions needed to get to that thought. With these numerous other hypotheses that are support the main hypothesis, there is no way to prove that if the conclusion does not agree with the hypothesis, the hypothesis is wrong. The only conclusion Duhem says Popper’s testing can make is that one part of the tester’s way of thinking is incorrect.
Popper saw a big gap in philosophy and science and believed that the purpose of philosophy was to bring clarity to real world problems, it must seek to tell us something about our place in the universe. However unlike some other branch of physical science in which one knows what the problem is and one goes to work on solving it, Popper put it clear that philosophy has no problem situation, there is no ground work of accepted facts onto which a new question can be placed. Science could in other words no longer be about finding evidence to prove a theory. Real philosophers or scientists would work to prove themselves wrong, attempting to find the gap in an existing theory. Only then might knowledge be worthy of its name.
5.Research hypothesis: It is a predictive statement that relates the independent variable to the dependent variable and to be tested by scientific methods is termed as research hypothesis. They must contain at least one independent variable and a dependent variable. The statements that are not objectively verified and the relationship between dependent and independent variables are not tested are not research
Information needs to be credible and confirmed through research. Information that is not trustworthy cannot be validity. “Validity in grounded theory is measured by the dependability of the conclusions on which the theory is based” (Sheperis, Young, & Daniels, 2010, p.130). For example, someone makes a conclusion based on one source. One source cannot be dependable because it takes more than one source to be credible.
Précising definitions are used because in some cases we need to use a particular term in a way that is more precise than a definition found in the dictionary. Hence, such definitions are not to be found in the dictionary. Précising definitions are conceptual tools of vast significance (Hall). An example of where précising definition was used is in units of measurement in science. “ Horse power” is commonly used in reporting the power of motors, but its vagueness brought about commercial deception.
The study focuses on the effects or outcome of the study, rather than intertwining the research inquiry with politics or having a philosophical approach. It will be more of a traditional form of research, which is intended to reduce the ideas into a small, discrete set to test, such as the variables that comprise hypotheses and research questions. Postpositivist worldview is sometimes called the scientific method and is usually best suited with quantitative research than qualitative. Research Design. Quantitative analysis is the best research design or strategies of inquiry for this study.
Since it is a supposition that can only be the starting point of an investigation based on known facts, a hypothesis has to be validated empirically. Every hypothesis can thus be proved or disproved. Hence when a hypothesis is stated, the null (or opposite) hypothesis must be stated alongside and their notations conventionally being H. # 1 and H # 0. Once a hypothesis has been tested and proved it becomes a theory. The process of converting a hypothesis into theory is the backbone of Research Methodology.
However, only being reflexive on one’s role as a researcher is not enough to remove the present power relations between researcher and respondent. Consequently, it is important to use strategies that are sensitive to the power imbalances and allow social research to connect with social change. Standpoint epistemology is presented by Sprague (2005) as one method to help to overcome the biases and power imbalances within research. This method is challenging the researchers authority to set the agenda, prioritize respondents of being the “knowledge-producer” and decide how to interpret and disseminate the results, among other things (Sprague, 2005). Ultimately, the researcher is the primary tool in qualitative research and thus, both England (1994) and Sprague (2005) argue that reflexivity is imperative to understand how the findings are presented and how knowledge is