The Scientific Process

11. Why is correlation data (data showing that two events occurred at the same time) not necessarily meaningful? Because one factor might not be the cause of the other.

The development of the scientific method in the late 1500’s to the early 1600’s was a crucial stepping-stone in the science community. The scientific method is based upon observations, hypotheses and experimentation. The concept is rather simple, and can be applied to many areas of study. Once an observation is made, the observer can make a hypothesis as to why that phenomenon occurs and can then design an experiment to prove whether or not that hypotheses is valid. Although the scientific method has been extremely useful in the discovery of various things from usages of medications to studying animal behavior, there are still those who question the usage of this tool. These critics claim that since

Why it is difficult for researchers to isolate specific causes of child behaviour - using two of your own examples. How is the term “correlation” a solution to this problem?

Pseudoscience is a claim or belief that does not conform to the scientific method. Generally, pseudoscience will have a lack of scientific evidence and will seem almost as an exaggeration. The evidence that is there to support it is not heavily supported or seems to be conforming to fit the “hypothesis”. In the article I found, James Cameron dove by himself to the deepest part of

Correlation is usually when two things tend to happen together at the same time and causation is something happens because of something else. I think it is harder to prove causation because

Correlation is not causation means that a correlation between two variables does not mean that one variable causes the other. Often there is a third variable that is not considered that can be tested and found to be the true cause of a particular event or outcome. One very good example that made everything clear to me is that an increase in ice cream sales causes an increase in drownings. It’s clear to most people that something is missing because this doesn’t make a lot of sense. The true variables that are causing the increase in drownings are the increase of temperatures and increase of people swimming. Researchers refer to this circumstance as the third variation problem (King p 34). With this example, it’s obvious that the independent variable is number of hot days; not the amount of ice cream sold and the dependent variable is the number of drownings. Stanovich says, Scientists often have to use incomplete knowledge to solve problems. The important thing is that we approach correlational evidence with a certain skepticism (Stanovich p 96). Although correlation evidence can be very deceiving, it is sometimes a very necessary starting point to create the causal evidence researchers are in search of. To clarify why correlation is not causation, correlation means that two variables are related and causation means that one variable causes the other to occur. Causation is simply cause and effect.

Researchers have studied the correlation between birth defects and tobacco. Correlation is not about cause and effect but rather how a relationship between two variables works

True or False: Cause and effect relationships cannot be determined using the coefficient of determination.

The Scientific Method is the standardized procedure that scientists are supposed to follow when conducting experiments, in order to try to construct a reliable, consistent, and non-arbitrary representation of our surroundings. To follow the Scientific Method is to stick very tightly to a order of experimentation. First, the scientist must observe the phenomenon of interest. Next, the scientist must propose a hypothesis, or idea in which the experiments will be based around. Then, through repeated experimentation, the hypothesis can either be proven false or become a theory. If the hypothesis is proven to be false, the scientist must reformulate his or her ideas and come up with another hypothesis, and the experimentation begins again. This

There are some demarcations to science from pseudo-science and non-science (Hansson, 2008). Science aims to unravel the way the natural world is and explain how it is and why it works in a particular manner (Hobson, 2001 & Bunge, 1982). It answers few of these questions by demonstrating the cause and the effects of various actions by presenting in descriptive and explanatory claims (Parse, 1995). Scientists prove their findings by explaining

As a drawback, there is no establishment of cause and effect in this research design since it is not sure that a single variable triggered a different one to occur, it may be one or another, or it might even be an unidentified variable that triggers the relationship (Creswell & Creswell, 2017).

Confounding variables, such as weather, type, scope, etc. can be associated with independent and dependent variables, but not necessarily prove an association or changes between the variables in a study. They do not prove that a dependent variable

In Medieval science lab, everything was about what people believed was not always right by science. Many historical movements such as alchemic rituals performed by old scientist, crude surgeries performed by plague doctors and many of the other cases were considered primitive, which was against what we believe because of science today. However, some of these primitive sciences, called “pseudoscience” (Molumby and Murray, 2007, p.28), have persisted the scientific method, in other words people still believe in false happenings in society even though they are scientifically wrong.

Many scientists talk about claims being true, e.g., it is true that heparin increases the clotting time of blood. Karl Popper pointed out; science does not progress on the backs of truths, but rather, on the backs of falsifications. A good scientist does not attempt to prove his claim to be true. He tries and proves his theory false. He starts with the illogical hypothesis: If theory X is not true, then Y should not happen. Then, if Y does happen, that shows that it is not the case that theory X is not true. In other words he, is to examine as much evidence as possible, in a manner that is as precise, and as objective as possible, and only after he has failed to prove his theory false, i.e., it is not the case that theory X is not true, it is he justified in proclaiming its truth, the theory an remain open for re-evaluation.

is the same as science, people research and study in science literally finding out the truth of