Inductive And Deductive Approach In Research Methodology Pdf
- and pdf
- Friday, January 29, 2021 2:40:46 PM
- 1 comment
File Name: inductive and deductive approach in research methodology .zip
To browse Academia. Skip to main content.
- 6.3 Inductive and deductive reasoning
- Recognising deductive processes in qualitative research
- Deductive, inductive and abductive approaches
- Research Methodology
Theories structure and inform sociological research. So, too, does research structure and inform theory. The reciprocal relationship between theory and research often becomes evident to students new to these topics when they consider the relationships between theory and research in inductive and deductive approaches to research.
6.3 Inductive and deductive reasoning
A feature of research designs are the approach to reasoning that they incorporate. There are various approaches that can be taken. Three of the main ways are deduction, induction and abduction. You can do deductive reasoning while sitting in your armchair.
Deductive reasoning involves inferring that if propositions A and B are both true, then this implies that C is also true. The classic example is over two thousand years old and involves the question of whether the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates was mortal. Statement A : All men are mortal.
Statement B : Socrates is a man. Inference : Since Socrates is a man, and all men are mortal, Socrates must therefore be mortal. Deductive reasoning can be used very effectively in combination with a powerful new theory e.
It can also be used to make inferences from the research literature, where different parts of the literature contain the initial statements for the deduction. Although deductive reasoning can be very powerful, its inferences need to be checked against reality, because it can easily produce results which look completely sound but which are based on subtle errors.
For instance, the Socrates example depends on statement A and statement B using exactly the same definitions of 'mortal' and 'man' as each other. It also assumes that no other factors are involved.
However, other factors are often involved in cases of deductive reasoning. Consider the following example. All eagles can fly Tweety is an eagle Therefore Tweety can fly. What if Tweety has a broken wing? Tweety would then be unable to fly. We could handle this by changing the initial statement to say 'All healthy eagles can fly'. However, there are many other reasons why an eagle might not be able to fly.
For example, Tweety might have had some wing feathers removed by the vet. If we list all the possible restrictions, then the statement can become very long or so restricted that it is of little use. Another problem involves the definition of 'eagle'.
This is a classification and classification is often complex, debatable or fuzzy. For instance, the usual classification of human adults into 'male' and 'female' assumes that everyone either has XX or XY chromosomes but this isn't the case.
There are people with XXY or XYY chromosomes, as well as numerous other conditions which make this classification fuzzy. These issues limit the usefulness of deductive reasoning in research. You may also be wondering where the initial statements come from, and the answer is usually that they come from observation of the world, which involves a further set of challenges for the researcher.
These challenges are clear in the case of inductive reasoning, described next. Observation : All the crows that I have ever seen were black Inference : All crows everywhere including ones I have never seen are black. A lot of research involves induction from observation of unexpected regularities. For example, you might collect a large sample of jokes to study and make the observation that most jokes about stupidity involve a social group who speak the same language as the person telling the joke but who live at the geographical border of the joke-teller's region.
You might then make the inductive inference that the same regularity might occur in other parts of the world that you haven't yet studied. Inductive reasoning can provide extremely valuable insights but has obvious limitations. It's usually based on a set of observations which is not complete, so you can't be sure whether you haven't seen a white crow because there are no white crows in the world, or whether there are some white crows in the world but you simply happen not to have seen any of them yet.
Abductive reasoning involves deciding what the most likely inference is that can be made from a set of observations. Observation : The grass outside my window was wet when I woke up this morning. Known fact : Rain in the night can make grass wet. Abductive inference : There was probably rain in the night. Abductive reasoning is important because there is often many or an infinite number of possible explanations for a phenomenon, so you need some way to decide which possible explanations to look at first.
In the case of the wet grass, for example, it's just about possible that the grass outside your window was wet because a lot of people walking by just happened to decide to empty their water bottles onto your lawn, but this is not very likely.
Usually when you're researching you start with the most likely explanation and see whether that's true. If it isn't, you move on to the next most likely explanation for example, that your lawn is wet because your neighbour was using a hose and accidentally sprayed your lawn.
There's a substantial literature about ways of assessing probabilities and assessing the strength of evidence. Designing your research. Distinguish deductive, inductive and abductive reasoning and understand their roles in research design. Read the text below. Deductive, inductive and abductive approaches A feature of research designs are the approach to reasoning that they incorporate.
Deductive reasoning You can do deductive reasoning while sitting in your armchair.
Recognising deductive processes in qualitative research
The main difference between inductive and deductive approaches to research is that whilst a deductive approach is aimed and testing theory, an inductive approach is concerned with the generation of new theory emerging from the data. A deductive approach usually begins with a hypothesis, whilst an inductive approach will usually use research questions to narrow the scope of the study. For deductive approaches the emphasis is generally on causality, whilst for inductive approaches the aim is usually focused on exploring new phenomena or looking at previously researched phenomena from a different perspective. Inductive approaches are generally associated with qualitative research, whilst deductive approaches are more commonly associated with quantitative research. However, there are no set rules and some qualitative studies may have a deductive orientation. One specific inductive approach that is frequently referred to in research literature is grounded theory, pioneered by Glaser and Strauss. This approach necessitates the researcher beginning with a completely open mind without any preconceived ideas of what will be found.
Though there seems to be some disagreement among researchers as to the best method to use when conducting research and gathering data, these two methods.
Deductive, inductive and abductive approaches
Published on April 18, by Raimo Streefkerk. Revised on November 11, The main difference between inductive and deductive reasoning is that inductive reasoning aims at developing a theory while deductive reasoning aims at testing an existing theory.
States that there are two general approaches to reasoning which may result in the acquisition of new knowledge: inductive reasoning commences with observation of specific instances, and seeks to establish generalisations; deductive reasoning commences with generalisations, and seeks to see if these generalisations apply to specific instances. Most often, qualitative research follows an inductive process. In most instances, however, theory developed from qualitative investigation is untested theory.
In logic, we often refer to the two broad methods of reasoning as the deductive and inductive approaches. Deductive reasoning works from the more general to the more specific. We might begin with thinking up a theory about our topic of interest. We then narrow that down into more specific hypotheses that we can test.
Theory structures and informs social work research. Conversely, social work research structures and informs theory.
A feature of research designs are the approach to reasoning that they incorporate. There are various approaches that can be taken. Three of the main ways are deduction, induction and abduction. You can do deductive reasoning while sitting in your armchair. Deductive reasoning involves inferring that if propositions A and B are both true, then this implies that C is also true. The classic example is over two thousand years old and involves the question of whether the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates was mortal.
Мидж… - Джабба попробовал извиниться. - Позволь мне объяснить. - Голос его, однако, мягче не. - Во-первых, у нас есть фильтр, именуемый Сквозь строй, - он не пропустит ни один вирус. Во-вторых, если вырубилось электричество, то это проблема электрооборудования, а не компьютерных программ: вирусы не отключают питание, они охотятся за программами и информацией. Если там и произошло что-то неприятное, то дело не в вирусах. Молчание.
Час сорок пять ночи. Он в недоумении посмотрел на двухцветного. - Ты сказал - в два ночи. Панк кивнул и расхохотался. - Похоже, ты облажался, приятель.
PDF | Research Methods. | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate.
Хейл же все время старался высвободиться и смотрел ей прямо в. - Как люди смогут защитить себя от произвола полицейского государства, когда некто, оказавшийся наверху, получит доступ ко всем линиям связи. Как они смогут ему противостоять. Эти аргументы она слышала уже много. Гипотетическое будущее правительство служило главным аргументом Фонда электронных границ.
Фонтейн стоял очень прямо, глядя прямо перед. У Бринкерхоффа был такой вид, словно он вот-вот лишится чувств.
- В обеих бомбах уран. Элементы, ответственные за Хиросиму и Нагасаки, - оба являются ураном. Никакого различия. - Мы погибли, - прошептала Мидж.