Skip to main content

What are the steps scientists take, to answer a question?

The scientific method is a logical method for problem solving. Generally, scientists will pose a concise question about an area of interest. 


Next, they will conduct research to find out what is known about the problem or question. Based on this, a scientist will formulate an hypothesis. This is an educated guess regarding a possible solution to the problem. A good hypothesis must be testable. It is written as an answer to the question or problem.


An example of a question is--will plants grow taller with the addition of fertilizer? One possible hypothesis is...Plants will grow taller when fertilizer is added.


This hypothesis can be tested by performing a controlled experiment. One group called the experimental group, will receive the variable being tested--(independent variable) while the other group known as the control group, is there for a comparison and will not receive the independent variable. The dependent variable will be the growth of the plant. The soil type, amount of sunlight, amount of water, type of plant used in the research, will all identical in the two groups. The only difference will be that the experimental group will receive the fertilizer.


A pre-determined amount of time for the experiment to take place, will be chosen and data will be collected regarding the growth rate of plants in the experimental and control set-ups. The data will be placed into charts, graphs and data tables and subsequently analyzed.


Eventually, a researcher will come to a conclusion. If the hypothesis is correct and is supported by the data, the hypothesis is accepted. If it is incorrect, a new hypothesis can be investigated. If fertilizer made plants grow taller, the results can be shared with others who can also do further research. 


I have included a link with scientific method steps.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more