History of the Scientific Method
The scientific method has changed over time. It is a dynamic process that is constantly shifting.
The scientific method originated many years ago, with Iraqi mathematician Ibn al-Haytham using it almost 1000 years ago and astronomers Galileo and Kepler using it in the 17th century [10]. From the 1930s onwards, the scientific method became common procedure and widespread [10].
The Scientific Method - A Possible Issue?
The scientific method is highly utilized in pure fundamental sciences and the natural sciences (such as Biology, Chemistry and Physics) due to its focus on repeatability, replication, and reduction in bias [10]. But, other non-natural social sciences (such as Sociology, Economics, and Anthropology) do not use the scientific method as readily but still publish in peer-reviewed journals [10].
Usually a working hypothesis needs to be proved or disproved by investigation [10]. But, not all hypotheses are proved by empirical testing [10]! For example, a lot of research from the ancient past was based on observation and thoughts [10]. In addition, many non-natural disciplines see the scientific method as rigid and constrained in design where the procedure only looks to answer specific questions on specific issues [10].
The structure of many journal articles follow the steps in the scientific method and involve peer review which allows others to look for mistakes, biases, or new ways an experimental question can be tested [10]. Although rigid, the scientific method still relies on human capabilities and hence documentation of experimentation is always going to be flawed [10].
This leads to one of the main problems in the scientific method where observations that lie outside the main hypothesis are often ignored or not as much importance is placed on them [10]. This can actually limit the growth of scientific knowledge as possibly important information can be discarded [10].
Another problem is that the scientific method is slow, due to the trial and error nature of it [10]. Often in the scientific method, unexpected results are not trusted and journals are generally not interested in publishing studies with results that are not expected or understood [10]. This can be problematic as it does not leave space for development or acceptance of other methods [10]. Some journals are no longer accepting publications that are based on unproven theoretical models, which can be a significant detriment to the non-natural sciences [10].
Over time, the scientific method in natural sciences changed from inductive to deductive reasoning.
Inductive reasoning is based on observations and deriving laws and theories from known information. After collecting evidence, a most probable hypothesis is formed, and further experiments are carried out to test the hypothesis. This hypothesis is then used as a general claim that explains a broader phenomenon. In the olden days, experiments only had limited approaches because technology was not as advanced as today. Many hypotheses and explanations were supported by observations but at the same time could not be proved or disproved using experiments [11].
​
In other words, inductive reasoning is going from the specific to the general [12].
Inductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning is based on experimental results and from those results, the hypothesis can be accepted or rejected. This is the basis of the modern day scientific method because to explain the validity of a hypothesis, it needs to be backed up with solid experimental evidence in order to be accepted by the scientific community [11].
​
To sum it up, deductive reasoning is going from the general to the specific [12].
Deductive Reasoning
Let's see if you can distinguish between inductive and deductive reasoning by working through the following exercise [13]. Read the sentences below and decide whether they are examples of inductive reasoning or deductive reasoning.
Example 1: My mother is Irish. She has blond hair. Therefore, everyone from Ireland has blond hair. This is inductive reasoning! We are going from specific claims (an Irish individual with blond hair) to a general claim (the whole Irish population has blond hair). However, conclusions made from inductive reasoning may not always be true.
Example 2: My mother is Irish. Everyone from Ireland has blond hair. Therefore, my mother has blond hair. This is deductive reasoning! We are making a specific conclusion (my mother has blond hair because she is Irish) from a general claim (the whole Irish population has blond hair).
Dynamic Changes
Non-natural sciences trying to mimic the “hard” sciences might not be the best approach as it does not allow for ideas, deep understanding of a subject and framing relevant to a specific discipline [10].
A new method is being proposed called the “model-based inquiry,” which respects the aspects of the scientific method (testable, explanatory, and revisable for example) but instead attempts to develop defensible explanations [10]. This sees models as tools for explanations which provides a space for new concepts, hypotheses and predictions that go beyond the data [10]. Another alternative, driven by the National Science Foundation, proposed a new method that accepts data that does not fit into organized and rigid conclusions [10].
It is important to realize that although rigid, like many aspects of science, the scientific method can change!
About Us
Science for Everyone is a Canadian Nonprofit Organization that provides educational resources to help raise the level of scientific literacy in the general population.