The 8 steps of the scientific method

Imagine that we see an apple fall from a tree, and the next day we see someone stumble and fall, and the next day as a child kicks a ball that inevitably ends up also on the ground. Perhaps it suddenly occurs to us that perhaps there is some kind of force that pulls and attracts bodies to the ground and that this can explain why the different masses tend to be in contact with the surface and to have a weight determined.

Although we are hinting at the existence of the force of gravity, we cannot consider such thoughts as scientific without more. It will be necessary to carry out a series of scientifically valid procedures In order to be able to propose its existence as a theory: we will need to use the scientific method. And this method requires a series of steps to develop knowledge.

In this article we will see what are the different steps of the scientific method, in order to see how scientific knowledge and different theories have had to go through a series of basic procedures to be considered as such.

• Related article: "The 15 types of research (and characteristics)"

The scientific method: general concept

Before going into talking about the steps you understand, first of all it is necessary to briefly establish what the scientific method is. It is understood as such the set of methodologies and steps by which science seeks knowledge and the formulation of hypotheses to be tested experimentally.

This method is a theoretical process that is applied in a systematic way with a certain order in order to generate valid and objective knowledge, based on empirical observation and the search for knowledge that can be refuted or falsified and that can be replicated if they are collected terms.

The methodology used in the scientific method can be variable, although the hypothetico-deductive procedure is generally used. This method has the advantage that as knowledge progresses, it is corrected in such a way that reject hypotheses and beliefs that are not validated, using the logic and objectivity of experimentation and replication..

Through this process, what we initially seem to observe will give rise to a series of hypotheses that by means of the research, observation and experimentation will be contrasted, generating knowledge more and more contrasted through controlled replication of events, something that little by little will produce theories and, in the long run and if our hypothesis is maintained in all the universally known conditions, laws.

Thus, the scientific method must be the basis of any research that wants to be called scientific, since it allows us to obtain a relatively objective knowledge of reality, helping us to answer numerous questions about it and the phenomena that therein occur, generating theories and laws in this regard and being able, based on them, to advance both at the level of knowledge and at the level of application practice of what is obtained.

The steps of the scientific method

As we have said, the scientific method is the main procedure that serves as the basis for the construction of scientific knowledge based on evidence, assuming its application the follow-up of a series of steps what allow to advance in the understanding of the phenomena. The steps that the scientific method follows are as follows.

1. Definition of the problem or question to be investigated

The first step of the scientific method is, logically, the establishment of a problem or question to be analyzed. It may be a phenomenon that we have observed and of which we intend to gain knowledge, or the perception that perhaps there may be a relationship with other phenomena.

But does not need to be based on direct observation, but it can also be based on a question that arises spontaneously or from the attempt to want to see if a belief is founded.

2. Assessment and review of previous experiments and antecedents

It is possible that the phenomenon that we have observed or the relationship that we have found viable has already been previously verified by other researchers, being necessary to do a review of the existing scientific literature about the topic.

Obtaining this information, as well as that which can be extracted from other investigations of rather theoretical character or even philosophy of science, allows to generate the theoretical framework of the study.

The theoretical framework is not a simple circumlocution, nor does it serve simply to educate the readers of the scientific article resulting from the research, but gives an idea of ​​the presuppositions and the purposes that the research team adopts, Way that helps to understand the why of what comes next.

3. Hypothesis generation

The observation or question in question generates a series of impressions in this regard, the researcher developing possible solutions to his questions. These possible solutions will for the moment be mere hypotheses, since they are proposed solutions to the original question that have not yet been tested.

It is important in this step to generate hypotheses that are testable, otherwise they could not go beyond being mere beliefs, and as far as possible operative. These hypotheses will allow making predictions about the behavior and interaction of the different variables related to the original question or problem.

Essentially, the hypothesis is a reference on which the investigation must turn, either to confirm it or to refute it. This allows you to go from the abstract to the concrete without forgetting what the purpose of that study is.

• You may be interested: "Karl Popper's philosophy and psychological theories"

4. Search / design and use of an empirical falsification method

The next step once the hypothesis is obtained is to choose and develop a methodology or experiment that allows in a systematic and controlled way to check if our proposed solution it holds. For this we have to take into account that the hypothesis has to be evaluated in a situation that is as controlled as possible, taking into account the interaction of variables beyond those intended.

In general, experimentation is used for this step, since it allows control of the situation and the variables in such a way that it can be observed if the proposed variables have any relationship. It is important to bear in mind that we will need large samples or the repetition of the experiment so that the result obtained is not merely accidental.

It is essential to assess the type of variables that we are going to use when testing our hypothesis, as well as the characteristics of the sample or the stimuli to be used and the control of possible variables foreign. It will be necessary to make these variables something operative, defining the values ​​that they may have in order to collect them later.

5. Experimentation or testing of the hypothesis

The next step, once the experiment or method to be used has been designed, is to carry out the experiment itself. It is important to collect the data in a systematic way, always in the same way so that there are no divergences that invalidate the possible interpretation of the data.

In addition the experiment is carried out by manipulating the variables, but without actively favoring that the result favors our hypothesis, otherwise we would be introducing a bias in the subsequent interpretation. In fact, we should aim rather to try to refute our hypothesis rather than confirm it.

• Related article: "Types of Hypotheses in scientific research (and examples)"

6. Comprehensive analysis of the results

The experiments carried out will yield a series of results, which must be analyzed so that later we can assess whether or not they correspond to the hypothesis that we held.

It is important to note that a single experiment on a single occasion is not enough in order to determine that a hypothesis is true or not, but must be replicated on numerous occasions or with different subjects.

The possible influence of factors other than those of our hypothesis that could interfere or generate one or another result regardless of whether the relationship between variables that we imagined is true or not. All this must be assessed through statistical methodology in order to assess whether our results are reliable and valid.

7. Interpretation

Once the results have been analyzed, it will be necessary to assess what they imply for our hypothesis, based on whether or not they are met. the predictions regarding the behavior of the variables that should have occurred if our hypothesis were correct. In short, this step intends to give an answer to the question or problem originally posed. If the data correspond, the experiment will support the hypothesis, and otherwise it will refute it.

Of course, we must bear in mind that we are only dealing with a positive or negative data from an experiment: it will be necessary replicate it to be able to determine if our hypothesis is fulfilled in other experimental conditions or in other experiments.

On the other hand, it is also necessary to take into account the limitations of the methodology used when investigating and of the nature of the concepts used when formulating the hypotheses and operationalizing the questions initials.

This is one of the steps of the scientific method where it matters most the discipline known as philosophy of science, since it allows to know to what extent it is valid or not to draw certain conclusions from the results of the analysis of the data worked. To do this, we reflect on the ontological nature of the phenomena studied, and on the possible weaknesses of the methods used from the point of view of epistemology.

8. Reformulation or generation of new hypotheses

Whether the hypothesis that we were holding has been empirically verified or not, it can be redefined or if it has been shown to be used as a basis for generating new knowledge and new questions, something that will make us understand in greater depth the phenomena and problems studied.

In any case, it should not be forgotten that the refutation of hypotheses also offers knowledge that it was not had before the investigation was carried out, so in those circumstances not everything is bad news.

Is replication part of the process?

In many cases it has been pointed out that scientifically extracted knowledge must be replicated. This does not mean re-analyzing the data obtained to see if another team of researchers reaches the same conclusions from the same information (which is known as reproduction), otherwise collect data similar to those collected by other scientists and reach the same or very similar conclusions.

For example, replicating a study on cognitive biases that predispose us to racism would mean taking another sample of people and find in that group the same biases, and in the same amount, as in the study we tried replicate.

However, whether this is a prerequisite is open to debate. For example, in certain fields of biology, psychology and social sciences it is not realistic to expect to find a group of data to analyze that reflect the same as what the initial study data set reflected. This, in principle, makes the replicability problems greater, so that an investigation that does not lead us to the same conclusions as another on the same subject is not in itself reason enough to discard a theory or a hypothesis.

In the same way, disciplines such as logic or mathematics often do not allow replicating studies, since that always starts from the same premises, and not from different groups of data but referring to the same phenomenon.

In any case, it should not be forgotten that under the label of "science" there are actually different sciences, and different scientific methods. Therefore, replication will be part of the steps of the scientific method only in those cases where it makes sense.

Bibliographic references:

• Barboza, M. (2015). Application of the scientific method in conducting medical legal expert opinions. Legal Medicine of Costa Rica- Virtual Edition, 32 (1). Costa Rica.
• Otzen, T., Manterola, C.m Rodríguez-Núñez, I. & García-Domínguez, M. (2017). The need to apply the scientific method in clinical research. Problems, benefits and feasibility of the development of research protocols. International Journal of Morphology, 35 (3): 1031-1036.
• Quintero, G.A. (1956). Brief history of the scientific method. Department of Fine Arts and publications of the Ministry of Education. Panama.
• Sotelo, N. and Pachamé, J. (2014). Module I: Scientific Method, scientific methodology applied to criminal investigation. National University of La Plata, Argentina.