Google

Among the strongest hypotheses are those formulated to distinguish between competing scientific theories. In this scenario, researchers identify two theories that offer conflicting explanations for the same phenomenon. They then design a study and derive a single hypothesis where each theory implies a mutually exclusive outcome. Because the predictions are opposite, observing the study's results will confirm one theory's prediction while simultaneously disconfirming the alternative.

Testing Competing Theories with Hypotheses

A study by Schwarz and colleagues illustrates the power of testing competing theories by investigating how individuals judge their own assertiveness. They compared two conflicting theories: one suggesting judgments are based on the number of examples recalled, and another suggesting judgments rely on the ease of recalling examples. By asking participants to recall either six (easy) or twelve (difficult) examples, the theories made mutually exclusive predictions. The finding that people recalling fewer examples felt more assertive provided decisive evidence supporting the ease-of-retrieval theory over the number-of-examples theory.

Example of Testing Competing Theories: Self-Judgment

What is the primary advantage of formulating a single hypothesis to distinguish between two competing scientific theories with mutually exclusive outcomes?

A researcher notices that Theory A predicts participants will perform better on a memory task under noisy conditions, while Theory B predicts they will perform worse. She designs a single experiment to test both predictions at once. If the results show that participants performed worse under noisy conditions, this outcome would provide evidence supporting Theory B while simultaneously counting as evidence against Theory A.

Learn Before

Related