KATHRYN V.L.

MAWIPUII

V SEM

SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH METHODS.

Q.HOW ARE HYPOTHESES FORMULATED?EXAMINE VARIOUS TYPES AND SOURCES OF HYPOTHESES

ANS: A hypothesis is an assumption about how two or more variables are related; it makes a conjectural
statement about the relationship between those variables. In sociology, the hypothesis will often predict
how one form of human behavior influences another. In research, independent variables are the cause
of the change. The dependent variable is the effect, or thing that is changed.For example, in a basic
study, the researcher would establish one form of human behavior as the independent variable and
observe the influence it has on a dependent variable At its initial stage, a hypothesis may be an
imagined idea or a hunch or a mere guess. It is in the form of a declarative sentence and always
indicates relation of one or more variable(s) with other variable(s) in a general or specific way. It is
mostly based on accumulated knowledge. A hypothesis is made to examine the correct explanation of
a phenomenon through investigation, to observe facts on the basis of collected data. If on the basis of
verification, the hypothesis is found to be valid, a theory is obtained. Thus, hypothesis a theory
entertained in order to study the facts and find out the validity of the theory.

The etymological meaning oof hypothesis, therefore, is a theory which is not full reasoned, derived
out of the combination of two words ‘hypo’ and ‘thesis’ meaning ‘less than’ and ‘reasoned theory of
rational view point’ respectively. Accordingly Mill defines hypothesis as “any supposition which we
make (either without actual evidence or an evidence avowedly insufficient) in order to endeavor to
deduce conclusions in accordance with facts which are known to be real, under the idea that if the
conclusions to which the hypothesis leads are known truths, the hypothesis itself either must be or at
least likely to be, true”. Likewise, Goode and Hatt define it as “a proposition which can be put to test
to determine validity”. P.V. Young says that a hypothesis “is provisional central idea which becomes
the basis for fruitful investigation, known as working theory” Coffey defines hypothesis as “an
attempt at explanation : a provisional supposition made in order to explain scientifically some facts
or phenomena”. Hypothesis is not a theory; rather hypotheses are linked and related to theory which
is more elaborate in nature as compared to hypothesis.

Therefore William H. George, while distinguishing between theory and hypothesis, described theory
as ‘elaborate hypothesis’. Hypothesis is not a claim of truth, but a claim for truth and hence serves as
a bridge in the process of investigation which begins with a problem and ends with resolution of the
problem. In the words of Cohen and Nagel “a hypothesis directs our search for the order.”There exist
two criteria for formulation of a good hypothesis. First, it is a statement about the relations between
variables. Secondly it carries clear implications for testing the stated relations. Thus, these couple of
criteria imply that the hypotheses comprise two or more variables which are measurable or
potentially measurable and that they specify the way in which they are related. A statement which
fails to meet these criteria is no scientific hypothesis in the true sense of the term. However, there are
legitimate hypotheses, formulated in factor analytic studies.
Types of Hypothesis:

Hypotheses may be of various kinds. It may be crude or refined. A crude hypothesis is at the lower level
of abstraction, indicating only the kind of data to be collected, not leading to higher theoretical research.
On the contrary, the refined hypothesis appears to be more significant in research. It may be in the form
of describing something in a given instance, that a particular object, situation or event has certain
characteristics. It may be in the form of counting the frequencies or of association among the variables.
It may be in the form of causal relationship that a particular characteristic or occurrence is one of the
causes determining the other.

On the basis of levels of abstraction, Goode and Hatt have distinguished three broad types of
hypotheses.First, there are the simple levels of hypotheses indicating merely the uniformity in social
behaviour. They are the most exact and the least abstract, as they state the existence of presence of
empirical uniformities. Often it is said that such hypotheses do not involve much verification or do not
require testing at all and they merely add up facts. But it is not correct to say so. Even empirical
researches describing certain facts need testing of hypotheses and testing may result in providing with
an altogether different profile.Secondly, there are complex ideal hypotheses at a higher level of
abstraction. These are more complex and aim at testing the existence of logically derived relationships
between empirical uniformities. They are in the form of generalization, and therefore are also a little
abstract. But empirical relationships are important in their context. Such hypotheses are useful in
developing tools of analysis and in providing constructs for further hypothesizing. Thirdly, there are
hypotheses which are very complex and quite abstract. They are concerned with the interrelations of
multiple analytic variables. They lead to the formulation of a relationship between changes in one
property and changes in another.The above kinds of hypotheses may be explained in an example. On
the basis of empirical data we may show statistical regularity by wealth, religion region, size of
community culture, tradition, health etc. First, we may formulate hypotheses in a simple manner on the
basis of statistical regularity. Secondly, in order to formulate a complex ideal hypothesis we may
combine all the factors together. As regards the formulation of the third category of hypothesis, more
abstraction is brought in. Only one of the factors can be studied at a time, such as relationship between
religion and fertility or wealth and fertility, and all other variables may be controlled. Obviously, it is a
very abstract way of handling the problem, because people may be affected by a multiplicity of
variables. Yet, we are interested in studying the cause and effect relationship of one factor at one time.
Hence, this level of hypothesizing is not only more abstract, simultaneously it is more sophisticated and
provides scope for further research.

The four important sources of hypothesis in social research, i.e, (1) General Culture in which a Science
Develops, (2) Scientific Theory, (3) Analogies, and (4) Consequences of Personal, Idiosyncratic Experience
as the Sources of Hypothesis are further given in detail:-

1. General Culture in which a Science Develops:

A cultural pattern influences the thinking process of the people and the hypothesis may be formulated
to test one or more of these ideas. Cultural values serve to direct research interests. The function of
culture has been responsible for developing today’s science to a great dimension. In the words of Goode
and Hatt, “to say that the hypotheses are the product of the cultural values does not make them
scientifically less important than others, but it does at least indicate that attention has been called to
them by the culture itself.For example, in society race is thought to be an important determinant of
human behaviour. Such a proposition can be used to formulate a hypothesis. We may also cite
metaphysical bias and metaphysical ideas of Indian culture to have been responsible for the formulation
of certain types of hypotheses. It implies that cultural elements of common cultural pattern may form a
source of the formulation of hypotheses.

2.Scientific Theory

A major source of hypothesis is theory. A theory binds a large body of facts by positing a consistent and
lawful relationship among a set of general concepts representing those facts. Further generalizations are
formed on the basis of the knowledge of theory. Corollaries are drawn from the theories.These
generalizations or corollaries constitute a part of hypothesis. Since theories deal with abstractions which
cannot be directly observed and can only remain in the thought process, a scientific hypothesis which is
concerned with observable facts and observable relationship between facts can only be used for the
purpose of selecting some of the facts as concrete instances of the concepts and for making a tentative
statement about the existence of a relation among the selected facts with the purpose of subjecting the
relation to an empirical test.”A hypothesis emerges as a deduction from theory. Hence, hypotheses
become “working instruments of theory” Every worthwhile theory provides for the formulation of
additional hypothesis. “The hypothesis is the backbone of all scientific theory construction; without it,
confirmation or rejection of theories would be impossible.”The hypotheses when tested are “either
proved or disproved and in turn constitute further tests of the original theory.” Thus the hypothetical
type of verbal proposition forms the link between the empirical propositions or facts and the theories.
The validity of a theory can be examined only by means of scientific predictions or experimental
hypothesis.

3. Analogies:

Observation of a similarity between two phenomena may be a source of formation of a hypothesis

aimed at testing similarity in any other respect. Julian Huxley has pointed out that “casual observation in
nature or in the framework of another science may be a fertile source of hypothesis. The success of a
system in one discipline can be used in other discipline also. The theory of ecology is based on the
observation of certain plants in certain geographical conditions. As such, it remains in the domain of
Botany. On the basis of that the hypothesis of human ecology could be conceived.
Hypothesis of social physics is also based on analogy. “When the hypothesis was born out by social
observation, the same term was taken into sociology. It has become an important idea in sociological
theory”. Although analogy is not always considered, at the time of formulation of hypothesis; it is
generally satisfactory when it has some structural analogies to other well established theories. For the
systematic simplicity of our knowledge, the analogy of a hypothesis becomes inversely helpful.
Formulation of an analogous hypothesis is construed as an achievement because by doing so its
interpretation is made easy.

4. Consequences of Personal, Idiosyncratic Experience as the Sources of Hypothesis:

Not only culture, scientific theory and analogies provide the sources of hypothesis, but also the way in
which the individual reacts to each of these is also a factor in the statement of hypotheses. Certain facts
are present, but every one of us is not able to observe them and formulate a hypothesis.Referring to
Fleming’s discovery of penicillin, Backrach has maintained that such discovery is possible only when the
scientist is prepared to be impressed by the ‘unusual’. An unusual event struck Fleming when he noted
that the dish containing bacteria had a green mould and the bacteria were dead. Usually he would have
washed the dish and have attempted once again to culture the bacteria.

But normally, he was moved to bring the live bacteria in close contact with the green mould, resulting in
the discovery of penicillin. The example of Sir Issac Newton, the discoverer of the theory of Gravitation,
is another glaring example of this type of ‘personal experience’. Although prior to Newton’s observation,
several persons had witnessed the falling of the apple, he was the right man to formulate the theory of
gravitation on the basis of this phenomenon.Thus emergence of a hypothesis is a creative manner. To
quote Mc Guigan, “to formulate a useful and valuable hypothesis, a scientist needs first sufficient
experience in that area, and second the quality of the genius.” In the field of social sciences, an
illustration of individual perspective may be visualized in Veblen’s work. Thorstein Veblen’s own
community background was replete with negative experiences concerning the functioning of economy
and he was a ‘marginal man’, capable of looking at the capitalist system objectively.Therefore, he could
be able to attack the fundamental concepts and postulates of classical economics and in real terms
Veblen could experience differently to bear upon the economic world, resulting in the making of a
penetrating analysis of our society. Such an excellent contribution of Veblen has, no doubt, influenced
social science since those days.