Inductive research starts off with specific observations and move toward general ideas or theory to capture what they show. (Qualitative)
Deductive Research starts with a general idea or theory and then moves to test it by looking at specific observations. (Quantitative)
Chat with our AI personalities
Deductive research starts with a hypothesis and seeks to test it through evidence and observations. Inductive research, on the other hand, starts with observations and seeks to draw conclusions or develop theories from those observations. For example, deductive research might involve testing a theory that predicts a cause-effect relationship, while inductive research might involve analyzing patterns in data to generate a new theory.
A deductive argument is one in which it is impossible for the premises to be true but the conclusion false. Thus, the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises and inferences. In this way, it is supposed to be a definitive proof of the truth of the claim (conclusion). Here is a classic example:
As you can see, if the premises are true (and they are), then it simply isn't possible for the conclusion to be false. If you have a deductive argument and you accept the truth of the premises, then you must also accept the truth of the conclusion; if you reject it, then you are rejecting logic itself.
What is an Inductive Argument?An inductive argument is one in which the premises are supposed to support the conclusion in such a way that if the premises are true, it is improbable that the conclusion would be false. Thus, the conclusion follows probably from the premises and inferences. Here is an example:In this example, even if both premises are true, it is still possible for the conclusion to be false (maybe Socrates was allergic to fish, for example). Words which tend to mark an argument as inductive - and hence probabilistic rather than necessary - include probably, likely, possibly and reasonably.
Deductive Arguments vs. Inductive ArgumentsIt may seem that inductive arguments are weaker than deductive arguments because there must always remain the possibility of their arriving at false conclusions, but that is not entirely true. With deductive arguments, our conclusions are already contained, even if implicitly, in our premises. This means that we don't arrive at new information - at best, we are shown information which was obscured or unrecognized previously. Thus, the sure truth-preserving nature of deductive arguments comes at a cost.Inductive arguments, on the other hand, do provide us with new ideas and thus may expand our knowledge about the world in a way that is impossible for deductive arguments to achieve. Thus, while deductive arguments may be used most often with mathematics, most other fields of research make extensive use of inductive arguments.
Inductive theory involves forming general principles based on specific observations, moving from specific instances to broader conclusions. Deductive theory involves applying general principles to specific situations, moving from general concepts to specific predictions or explanations. Essentially, inductive reasoning builds from observation to theory, while deductive reasoning applies theory to specific situations.
The deductive method starts with a hypothesis and tests it against observations or evidence, leading to a conclusion. Meanwhile, the inductive method involves making observations, identifying patterns, and forming a general theory or hypothesis. Deductive reasoning moves from general principles to specific instances, while inductive reasoning moves from specific instances to general principles.
Weaknesses of deductive arguments include the potential for an invalid conclusion if the premises are not true. Inductive arguments may be strong but still have a risk of producing a false conclusion due to the nature of induction, which relies on probability rather than certainty.
Deductive analysis is a method of reasoning that involves making specific conclusions based on general principles or theories. It starts with a hypothesis and then tests it against available evidence in order to reach a logical conclusion. This approach is commonly used in mathematics, philosophy, and scientific research to establish relationships between ideas.
Applied research focuses on solving practical problems through the application of existing knowledge and theories, while action research involves engaging stakeholders in identifying issues, taking action, and reflecting on the outcomes to drive change and improvement. Action research is more collaborative, participatory, and iterative compared to applied research.