Call us toll-free

Welcome to the Journal of Articles in Support of the Null Hypothesis

A hypothesis (plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon

Approximate price


275 Words


how do you evaluate a hypothesis? | Yahoo Answers

As such, by taking a hypothesis testing approach, Sarah and Mike want to generalize their results to a population rather than just the students in their sample. However, in order to use hypothesis testing, you need to re-state your research hypothesis as a null and alternative hypothesis. Before you can do this, it is best to consider the process/structure involved in hypothesis testing and what you are measuring. This structure is presented .

hypothesis evaluation matrix Flashcards | Quizlet

CORRECTION: This misconception may be reinforced by introductory science courses that treat hypotheses as "things we're not sure about yet" and that only explore established and accepted theories. In fact, hypotheses, theories, and laws are rather like apples, oranges, and kumquats: one cannot grow into another, no matter how much fertilizer and water are offered. Hypotheses, theories, and laws are all scientific explanations that differ in breadth — not in level of support. Hypotheses are explanations that are limited in scope, applying to fairly narrow range of phenomena. The term is sometimes used to refer to an idea about how observable phenomena are related — but the term is also used in other ways within science. Theories are deep explanations that apply to a broad range of phenomena and that may integrate many hypotheses and laws. To learn more about this, visit our page on .

The Language of Thought Hypothesis (Stanford …

But the inductive evaluation of that hypothesis itself requires ..

CORRECTION: This misconception likely stems from introductory science labs, with their emphasis on getting the "right" answer and with congratulations handed out for having the "correct" hypothesis all along. In fact, science gains as much from figuring out which hypotheses are likely to be wrong as it does from figuring out which are supported by the evidence. Scientists may have personal favorite hypotheses, but they strive to consider multiple hypotheses and be unbiased when evaluating them against the evidence. A scientist who finds evidence contradicting a favorite hypothesis may be surprised and probably disappointed, but can rest easy knowing that he or she has made a valuable contribution to science.

CORRECTION: When newspapers make statements like, "most scientists agree that human activity is the culprit behind global warming," it's easy to imagine that scientists hold an annual caucus and vote for their favorite hypotheses. But of course, that's not quite how it works. Scientific ideas are judged not by their popularity, but on the basis of the evidence supporting or contradicting them. A hypothesis or theory comes to be accepted by many scientists (usually over the course of several years — or decades!) once it has garnered many lines of supporting evidence and has stood up to the scrutiny of the scientific community. A hypothesis accepted by "most scientists," may not be "liked" or have positive repercussions, but it is one that science has judged likely to be accurate based on the evidence. To learn more about , visit our series of pages on the topic in our section on how science works.

Research- Meaning (Session 1) | Hypothesis | Evaluation

20/05/2011 · Evaluation of the injured runner: developing the clinical hypothesis

CORRECTION: This misconception is based on the idea of falsification, philosopher Karl Popper's influential account of scientific justification, which suggests that all science can do is reject, or falsify, hypotheses — that science cannot find evidence that one idea over others. Falsification was a popular philosophical doctrine — especially with scientists — but it was soon recognized that falsification wasn't a very complete or accurate picture of how scientific knowledge is built. In science, ideas can never be completely proved or completely disproved. Instead, science accepts or rejects ideas based on supporting and refuting evidence, and may revise those conclusions if warranted by new evidence or perspectives.

LOTH is an hypothesis about the nature of thought and thinking withpropositional content. As such, it may or may not be applicable toother aspects of mental life. Officially, it is silent about thenature of some mental phenomena such as experience, qualia,[] sensory processes, mental images, visual and auditory imagination,sensory memory, perceptual pattern-recognition capacities, dreaming,hallucinating, etc. To be sure, many LOT theorists hold views aboutthese aspects of mental life that sometimes make it seem that they are also tobe explained by something similar to LOTH.[]

Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis - Oxford Scholarship
Order now
  • Evaluation apprehension, hypothesis awareness, and …

    Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

  • Tips and strategies for teaching the nature and process …

    The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis addresses the criteria that are set forth for evaluation and meets them very well

  • Evaluation Toolkit | USAID Learning Lab

    HyQue: evaluating hypotheses using Semantic Web technologies Journal of Biomedical Semantics Full Text

Order now

Social Research Methods - Knowledge Base - Hypotheses

CORRECTION: Scientists do strive to be unbiased as they consider different scientific ideas, but scientists are people too. They have different personal beliefs and goals — and may favor different hypotheses for different reasons. Individual scientists may not be completely objective, but science can overcome this hurdle through the action of the scientific community, which scrutinizes scientific work and helps balance biases. To learn more, visit in our section on the social side of science.

The Language of Thought Hypothesis ..

CORRECTION: Perhaps because the last step of the Scientific Method is usually "draw a conclusion," it's easy to imagine that studies that don't reach a clear conclusion must not be scientific or important. In fact, scientific studies don't reach "firm" conclusions. Scientific articles usually end with a discussion of the limitations of the tests performed and the alternative hypotheses that might account for the phenomenon. That's the nature of scientific knowledge — it's inherently tentative and could be overturned if new evidence, new interpretations, or a better explanation come along. In science, studies that carefully analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the test performed and of the different alternative explanations are particularly valuable since they encourage others to more thoroughly scrutinize the ideas and evidence and to develop new ways to test the ideas. To learn more about publishing and scrutiny in science, visit our discussion of .

Submit an article Journal homepage ..

The results were interpreted as suggesting that evaluation apprehension, hypothesis awareness, and sophistication in aggression experiments may produce inhibitions which can modify the effects of experimental manipulations.

Hypothesis Definition, Checklist, and Examples

LOTH has primarily been advanced as an empirical thesis(although some have argued for the truth of LOTH on a priori orconceptual grounds following the natural conceptual contours of folkpsychology—see Davies 1989, 1991; Lycan 1993; Rey 1995; Jacob1997; Markic 2001 argues against Jacob. Harman 1973 develops anddefends LOTH on both empirical and conceptual grounds). It is notmeant to be taken as an analysis of what the folk mean (or,for that matter, what the scientists ought to mean) when they talkabout various propositional attitudes and their role in thinking. Inthis regard, LOT theorists typically view themselves as engaged insome sort of a proto-science, or at least in some empirical researchprogram continuous with scientific psychology. Indeed, as we will seein more detail below, when Jerry Fodor first explicitly articulatedand elaborated LOTH in some considerable detail in his (1975), hebasically defended it on the ground that it was assumed by our bestscientific theories or models in cognitive psychology andpsycholinguistics. This empirical status generally accorded to LOTHshould be kept firmly in mind when assessing its plausibility andespecially its prospects in the light of new evidence and developmentsin scientific psychology. Nevertheless, it would be more appropriateto see LOTH more as a foundational thesis rather than as an ongoingresearch project guided by a set of concrete empirical methods,specific theses and principles. In this regard, LOTH stands tospecific scientific theories of the (various aspects of the) mindsomewhat like the “Atomic Hypothesis” stands to a wholebunch specific scientific theories about the particulate nature of theworld (some of which may be—and certainly historically, havebeen—incompatible with each other).

Order now
  • Kim

    "I have always been impressed by the quick turnaround and your thoroughness. Easily the most professional essay writing service on the web."

  • Paul

    "Your assistance and the first class service is much appreciated. My essay reads so well and without your help I'm sure I would have been marked down again on grammar and syntax."

  • Ellen

    "Thanks again for your excellent work with my assignments. No doubts you're true experts at what you do and very approachable."

  • Joyce

    "Very professional, cheap and friendly service. Thanks for writing two important essays for me, I wouldn't have written it myself because of the tight deadline."

  • Albert

    "Thanks for your cautious eye, attention to detail and overall superb service. Thanks to you, now I am confident that I can submit my term paper on time."

  • Mary

    "Thank you for the GREAT work you have done. Just wanted to tell that I'm very happy with my essay and will get back with more assignments soon."

Ready to tackle your homework?

Place an order