Ideological Reasoning

*

Learning Outcomes

• The chapter first explains empirical reasoning and how it works as a self-corrective process.
• It further applies empirical reasoning correctly.
• Finally, it describes the uses, benefits, and risks of empirical reasoning.

*

Chapter Opening Video

• The video portrays how empirical reasoning can be used to resolve problems.
• Empirical reasoning contrasts with ideological reasoning as mentioned in the video.

*

Recognizing Empirical Reasoning - Empirical investigations are designed to see whether a hypothesis can be disconfirmed.

• Reveal the limits of current understanding and refine explanations and make precise predictions.
• Characteristics of empirical reasoning
• Empirical reasoning is inductive in character and open to self-corrective revision.
• Argument makers take their empirical premises to be true on the basis of interpersonally verifiable experience.
• Hypotheses, conditions, and measurable manifestations
• Hypothesis can be expressed as a supposition or a general statement.
• Often expressed as null hypothesis.

*

Characteristics of Empirical Reasoning

• Empirical reasoning: Process of thinking that proceeds from premises describing interpersonally verifiable experiences to support or to disconfirm hypotheses, which are intended to explain and predict phenomena.
• Inductive
• Conclusions reached are probabilistic even with high levels of confidence.
• Self-corrective
• Researcher is responsible for devising the means to acquire the data that will be relevant and revise his or her hypothesis as new information is gained.
• To answer empirical research questions, investigators examine data gathered using instruments designed to find the data that they expect to exist.
• Open to scrutiny and independent verification
• Other scientists are encouraged to gather additional data, re-create experiments, and recalculate statistical findings.
• Replication studies are used to verify that the observations and findings reported by the original scientist are true.
• Lead to collaborations that advance scientific understanding of phenomena.

*

Empirical Reasoning or Bottom-Up Thinking

• Gives an illustration of empirical reasoning.

*

Hypotheses, Conditions, and Measurable Manifestations

• Hypothesis can be expressed as a supposition or a general statement.
• Supposition - “If things of a certain kind are placed under certain conditions, then we will be able to observe certain phenomena.”
• General statement - “Certain kinds of objects behave in certain ways under certain conditions.”
• Null hypothesis: Two phenomena are entirely unrelated except by random chance.
• Invite further inquiry when false, help investigators maintain a level of objectivity during their work.
• Empirical reasoning arguments describe states of affairs created experimentally or measured in natural settings.
• Creating specific conditions in the lab:
• Reduces influences of extraneous factors.
• Weakens generalizability of findings.

*

Conducting an Investigation Scientifically

• Many steps are involved in investigating an empirical question logically, systematically, and in a way that allows others in the scientific and professional community to verify the results through replication.
• Steps in the process - An extended example
• Describes in detail how a team of researchers would scientifically investigate an empirical question.
• Evaluating empirical reasoning
• Truthfulness of the premises, test for logical strength, test of relevancy, test of non-circularity, and peer review tests are used to evaluate an empirical reason.

*

Steps in the Process - An Extended Example

• Case - Effects of workplace environment on motivation and productivity of group office workers need to be analyzed.
• Identify a problem of significance.
• The problem here is how does the office environment affect the productivity and job motivation of employees working in a group office setting?
• Form a hypothesis.
• The hypothesis needs to describe what one can expect to happen under certain conditions.
• Review the scientific literature.
• The purpose is to see what can be learned from the work of others about this hypothesis or similar hypotheses.
• Identify all factors related to the hypothesis and the phenomenon of interest.
• Factors that are important to measure, control, or monitor need to be considered.
• In this case noise, distractions, personalization of the workstation, window view, productivity, traffic, and motivation need to be measured.

*

Steps in the Process - An Extended Example

• Case - Effects of workplace environment on motivation and productivity of group office workers need to be analyzed.
• Make each factor measurable.
• Noise - Number of decibels.
• Personalization of the workstation - Number of personal objects displayed.
• Traffic - Number of persons who pass within 3 feet of the person’s chair.
• Window views - Presence or absence of an unobstructed view out through a window located within 7 feet of the person’s chair.
• Productivity - Phone and e-mail messages sent and received in a randomly selected 1-hour period.
• Motivation - Statements affirming desire to work as recorded during a personal interview
• Experience - Years in the job.
• Job Knowledge and Importance - Scales in an employee survey.
• Ensure that the experimental conditions can be met.
• Sufficient number of office workers, authorization from supervisors, approval from relevant human subjects review boards, and consent of the experimental subjects need to be ensured.

*

Steps in the Process - An Extended Example

• Case - Effects of workplace environment on motivation and productivity of group office workers need to be analyzed.
• Design a procedure.
• The procedure should ensure that the data gathered will reveal the full range of possible observations.
• Run a pilot study.
• This helps test the feasibility of the design plan.
• Conduct the study/experiment and gather the data.
• Divide the workers into groups, conduct the interviews and record all the data for analysis.
• Conduct appropriate analyses of the data.
• Interpret the findings and discuss their significance.
• If workplace distractions are limited, noise is reduced, and traffic is minimized, then one can expect modest increases in productivity.
• These findings may be of interest to interior design architects and supervisors who configure group workplace settings.

*

Steps in the Process - An Extended Example

• Case - Effects of workplace environment on motivation and productivity of group office workers need to be analyzed.
• Critique the findings.
• This can help discover flaws in the design plan.
• Publish the research.
• Contribute to our better understanding of the workplace environment.
• Design a follow up study.

*

Evaluating Empirical Reasoning

• Tests to determine the worthiness of an argument
• Truthfulness of the premises
• Ensured by the accuracy of the measurements and the descriptions of the conditions under which the investigation is conducted.
• Test for logical strength
• Investigators need to consider appropriate statistical tests for the kinds of data they are gathering.
• Thoughtfully designed and carefully conducted investigations help determine the probable truth or falsity of the hypothesis.
• Test of relevancy and test of non-circularity - Research study should not move forward until these issues are addressed.
• All the factors relevant to testing the hypothesis or observing the phenomenon should be identified by the investigators as they designed the empirical research.
• A well-designed and well-executed project can be expected not to be circular.
• Peer review
• The researcher’s ideas, methods, and inferences about the findings are scrutinized by other experts in the same field of study.
• Designed to screen out research that violates one or more of the four tests of the worthiness of an argument.

*

Benefits and Risks Associated with Empirical Reasoning

• Used when an individual wants to explain, predict or control what happens.
• Powerful and interconnected purposes.
• Accurate predictions enable people to anticipate what is likely to happen under certain conditions.
• Consistently making precise and accurate predictions depends on knowing how to explain the causes that bring about the phenomenon of interest.
• Can be complicated, errors can occur
• Confirmatory findings support a hypothesis.
• Scope of questions that guide empirical investigations is broad, but not universal.

*

Benefits and Risks Associated with Empirical Reasoning

• Group endeavors - Empirical investigation, and the application of critical thinking skills and habits of mind to scientific inquiry.
• Science progresses when the scientific community can evaluate the merits of an investigation through replications and refinements of the original investigation.
• Empirical reasoning self-monitors and self-corrects through independent inquiry.
• Applies the four tests of logical quality of arguments at every stage of scientific investigation.

*

Discussion Question

• “Science is a way to keep from fooling ourselves -- and each other.” - Anne Druyan, Executive Producer, & Steven Soter, Astrophysicist
• What are they referring to? Give an example.
• The discussion questions should help the students reflect on the benefits of empirical reasoning.

*

Sketchnote Video

• This video summarizes the concept of empirical reasoning and its purpose.

*