Topic Refinement and Hypothesis Formulation

http://euprhates.wpunj.edu/faculty/wagnerk/comm244/topic_hypothesis.htm

Variable – any entity that can take on different values. Anything that can be assigned a value. Age can change. Nationality can differ. Variables are not always ‘quantitative’ or numerical. The variable ‘gender’ consists of two text values: ‘male’ and ‘female’.

Attribute – a specific value on a variable. For instance, the variable sex or gender has two attributes: male and female. Or, the variable agreement might be defined as having five attributes:

1=strongly agree

2=disagree

3=neutral

4=agree

5=strongly agree

TYPES of VARIABLES

This becomes important when investigating cause-effect relationships (e.g. Violent Television causes Child Misbehavior)

Independent Variable is what you (or nature) manipulates. This is the “cause”. Examples would be “watching violent television” in the above cause-effect example. Or, if the research is about “Do campus car thefts occur more frequently during the daytime or nighttime?” The independent variable is “daytime” or “nighttime”.

Dependent Variable is what is affected by the independent variable. This is the “effect” or outcome of the independent variable. Using the above examples: “child misbehavior” (frequent or infrequent) or “car theft frequency” (seldom or often).

Two traits of variables should always be achieved. Each variable should be exhaustive, including all possible answerable responses. For instance, if the variable is “religion” and the only options are “Protestant”, “Jewish”, and “Muslim”, there are quite a few religions that have not been included. The list does not exhaust all possibilities. On the other hand, an exhaustive list may be too long, so in some cases you will have to list the most common attributes and then use a general category such as “other” to account for remaining choices. The attributes of a variable should be mutually exclusive, meaning no respondent should be able to have two attributes simultaneously.

Hypothesis - a tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation. A hypothesis describes in concrete terms, in the form of a statement, what you expect will happen in your study.

Research question – “How could extended use of the Internet negatively affect college students’ academic performance?”

Extended use of the Internet negatively affects most college students’ academic performance

Independent variable = internet use – attributes: high, moderate, low, none

Dependant variable (the thing that changes when the independent variable changes) = academic performance – attributes: grades/GPA

Hypothesis – “Extended use of the Internet for recreational purposes has a negative affect on college student academic performance.”

Each hypothesis can be thought of as having two aspects. The first aspect describes the prediction, as stated above. The second aspect describes all the other possible outcomes with respect to the hypothesized relationship. The prediction is that variables A and B are related. The only other possible outcome is that variables A and B are not related. We call the first, supported, hypothesis the alternative hypothesis. We call the hypothesis that describes the remaining possible outcome the null hypothesis.

Refining Your Topic

The reading and pre-research process is aided by an organized approach. During this process you may adjust your topic to better fit your interests, the trends in the subject area you are researching, or if something your run across seems like it will prove fruitful. To make the best use of your time and to improve your organization, follow this scheme:

categorize your potential sources into general-to-specific. General sources would include reference books, dictionaries, specialized encyclopedias or handbooks. More specific sources would include books on the subject at hand. The most specific materials will be journal articles dealing with direct observation or empirical studies.

consider the audience as well as your own purposes. Popular or commercial magazines may contain current opinion or popular culture perspectives. Scholarly journals and academic-oriented books will provide material from recognized authorities.

always examine the bibliography of your sources

begin to prepare your preliminary bibliography. This will consist of full bibliographic citations to books and journal articles that you think you may be using. You will be adding to this list. You will not necessarily use all these items. It’s helpful to start a written or word processed list like this (with some notes):

Sabatino, S. (2000). Memories of the energy crisis: How quickly we forget the lessons of the past. Journal of Energy and Resource Management, 16(3), 1-17.

Shows relationship between gender and internet use on p. 15. discussion of use patterns on p. 34 is perfect.

Longmire, L. (2001). Untying the tongue: gender, power, and the word. New York: Basic Books.

Great overview. Good bibliography. Charts in Ch. 2 are key.

Payne, K. (2001). Different but equal: communication between the sexes. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Payne is the major author in this field. Several quotes (p. 3, 25, 199) I can use. I’m not interested in the statistical angle.

Matthew, M. J., & Wolk, R. (1999, January). And you think it's hot here! A letter from the Tropic of Cancer. American Airlines Travel Club Magazine, 17, 6-11.

Duffy, B., & Theus, P. T. (2000). College students' involvement in customer service evaluation at academic libraries. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(1), pp. 31- 45. Retrieved September 5, 2000, from Academic Search Premier database.

Two Research Fallacies – as you read, beware of these

The ecological fallacy occurs when you make conclusions about individuals based only on analyses of group data. Example: you measure math scores in a classroom and found that they had the highest score in the district. Later, at the mall, you run into one of the kids from that class and you think to yourself “she must be a math whiz.” This is a fallacy or mistaken notion. Just because she comes from the class with the highest average doesn’t mean that she is automatically a high-scorer in math. She could have had the lowest score in the class.

The exception fallacy is the reverse of the ecological fallacy. It occurs when you reach a group conclusion on the basis of exceptional cases. This is the kind of fallacious reasoning that is at the core of a lot of sexism and racism. The stereotype is of the guy who sees a woman make a driving error and concludes that “women are terrible drivers.”

Logical fallacies represent errors in thinking. They often sound reasonable and are accepted commonly. It’s important to be able to recognize such fallacies in the sources you read.

against the person: confusing the validity of an argument with the character of the person who makes it. We can’t trust the testimony of a DNA scientist who once declared bankruptcy and has been divorced twice, can we?

appeal to authority: assuming that the authority or reputation of an individual is evidence for the truth of his or her views. I will buy that Volkswagen because I saw Nichole Kidman’s advertisement and she’s a great actress!

appeal to ignorance: arguing that a claim must be true simply because no one has shown that it is false. There must be extraterrestrials. No one has proven that ETs or aliens do not exist.

appeal to pity: attempting to persuade by arousing pity instead of addressing the real issue. Newly discovered drug XYZ has helped slow the process of Alzheimer’s Disease. AD robs its victims of their memories and personality and destroys families. XYZ must be funded.

appeal to the people (bandwagon): arguing that something is right or best because many others think that it is. Everyone copies text from things they find online, so it is OK for me to do it.

circular definition: restating an assumption as part of its proof. Overuse of the Internet is harmful because it harms people to use the Internet too much.

equivocation: shifting the meanings of the terms used in an argument. You claim that overuse of the Internet is harmful. If it is harmful, then the Internet must be filtered and censored to make it safe. The speaker has changed the intended meaning of the hypothesis, shifting the emphasis from “overuse” to “harmful” and also shifting the focus of the statement.

false analogy: using a comparison in which the differences between two things are greater than their similarities or in which the similarities are irrelevant to the argument being made. Referring to television as the plug-in drug, for example, overlooks major differences between the varied causes of habitual TV watching and those of life-destroying, addictive drugs.

false cause (post hoc, ergo propter hoc): Assuming a cause-effect relationship because two events are related in time. This means “after this, therefore because of this”. Often the reasoning behind superstition such as “We’ve had an eclipse, then the crops went bad, therefore the eclipse caused the crop failure.”

false dilemma: Arguing for a conclusion as if there are only two alternatives. “Either learn to play golf or forget about getting that job as vice president of the company.”

hasty generalization: Drawing a conclusion based on inadequate evidence. Arguing that Professor Wagner’s exams are easy after taking only one is a hasty generalization.

poisoning the well: using loaded language to discourage discussion of an argument before examining it. Saying that no one who cares about children will hesitate to support this law intimidates would-be opponents and discourages them from responding. Supporters of the law must defend themselves against this charge.

red herring: diverting discussion of an issue by introducing another, unrelated topic. The term red herring derives from the fact that smoked herring is strong smelling and used to divert hunting dogs from a trail. Yes, we may need to look at this city’s use of landfills, but isn’t the problem of illiteracy among our high school graduates more important?

slippery slope: claiming that an action should not be taken because doing so will lead to a chain of undesirable events. This reasoning assumes one action will inevitably lead to the next, then the next, and so on until a calamitous point is reached. Once assault weapons are banned, other automatic weapons will be banned next, then handguns, and so on until all guns are banned.

Assignment 1 – Topic Selection – 15%/15 points

Please follow this format.

1. Your topic idea:

2. Define your topic: this should be a paragraph about your topic idea.

3. Results of initial, reference-based information gathering. Describe the reference materials, general books, library online catalog searching, and other activities you’ve done to “pre-research” your topic. List book titles and authors, if you’ve noted “authorities” in the field you are interested in, and what you may have learned about the name of the subject you are researching.

list keywords and/or synonyms you are using in your search

describe what you feel are the limits and/or bounds of the subject you are proposing

4. Statement of research viability – this is a discussion about what you feel about this subject. I’d like your opinion on the topic, what point you might be trying to make. Take a shot at a hypothesis in a casual sort of manner…you’ll refine it later.

This should be about three typed pages in length.