Objectives and hypotheses

Wim BuysseRic Coe

RUFORUM 28 November 2006

Research Methods Group

Part 1. The importance of setting objectives

Research Methods Group

Where do you want to be in life 10 years from now ?

Research Methods Group

Where does my organisation/firm wants to be 10 years from now ?

Research Methods Group

Keeney, R.L.1992Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision making. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Research Methods Group

Research Methods Group

Research Methods Group

A real life example

Research Methods Group

• You have a job in Nairobi• Your wife is offered a job in Kisumu• Alternatives: we live apart or ‘she’ can’t work• What are your values – you want to live in the

same town, and you both want to work• Focusing on values drives you to create

alternatives (as opposed to choosing among existing alternatives)

• Innovate – You convince your company you can start up a new office in Kisumu

Setting objectives

Research Methods Group

Setting objectives (in life/in management of an organisation) provides structure, purposiveness, focus, meaning and enables you to measure progress in the right direction or the lack of it.

Setting objectives in a research project

Research Methods Group

The hypothetico-deductive method

Research Methods Group

• induction = inferring a general law or principle from the observation of particular instances

• deduction = inferring from generals to particulars

Research = learning to solve problems

Research Methods Group

So far it has been a soup

Research Methods Group

"Science consists of both knowledge and the process by which this knowledge is created, research. Although research succeeds by building and testing better theories, the process involves constructs, concepts, and activities that are not themselves predictive. Non-predictive constructs serve science as logical devices, memory aids, inspirational prods, incentives to thought, political opinions, personal ideals, half-formed notions, odd beliefs, and unexpressed ideas. These elements are not 'bad' or unscientific. They form a prescientific soup from which each scientist draws inspiration and from which the disciplined human mind has constructed modern science." 

Peters, Robert Henry (1991) A critique for ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 366 pp. ISBN 0 521 39588 7 - p. 21

synthetic or private phase

Synthetic or private phase

Research Methods Group

•Logic•Knowledge of discipline•Creativity•Imagination•Lateral thinking

The importance of setting objectives = structure

Research Methods Group

The objectives drive the rest of the study.

• your hypotheses• the kind of study that needs to be

done (experiment, survey, ....)• the treatments that have to be

compared• the population to be sampled• the data to be collected• the formal statistical analysis

needed• ....

analyticor public phase

Analytic or public phase

Research Methods Group

Ability to extrapolate findings beyond a given location and to make some kind of prediction rather than just a description.

Communicate findings => ‘public’ phase

When? For ALL types of research!

• Biophysical, social, economic, policy…• Lab, field, landscape,…• Participatory,…• Strategic, applied, adaptive• …

• Maybe NOT for activities with local ‘development’ outcomes only

Research Methods Group

Part 2. The confusion

Research Methods Group

The confusion

Research Methods Group

• research questions• overall objectives• specific objectives• one hypothesis• several hypotheses• null-hypothesis• hypothesis testing

• and their order

Basically

Research Methods Group

Objectives– Why you are doing the work

• Hypotheses– Elements of theory you will test– A testable hunch

• (Research questions)– Overall statement of what you are going to

research

Part 3. ‘Good’ objectives

Research Methods Group

Objectives

• The overall aim • Must be…

– Clear – Complete– Relevant– Reasonable– Capable of being met by the activities (experiments

and surveys)– NOT ‘To compare treatments’ or ‘To compare

populations’…

Research Methods Group

Example Objective

"To evaluate 4 improved mango varieties".– Which varieties?– Under what conditions (location,

management) are they to be evaluated?– What criteria will be used to evaluate them? – Linked to what problem solving strategy? – What is the science behind this?

Research Methods Group

"To determine whether the survival and growth rates, during the first two years, of improved mango varieties (Kent, Van Dyke, Tommy Atkins and Sensation) can be brought up to the level of the local variety by using a higher level of management ( addition of manure and water), when these trees are grown in crop fields of the coffee zone of Embu, Kenya"

Better?

Research Methods Group

A characterisation of the research process

observe

reflect

generalise

plan

Question theory

Formulate modifications

Design studies

Collect data

Interpret

Update theory

Research Methods Group

Hypotheses

• Modifications of, additions to, or new theory…

• …that generate alternative predictions…

• …that can be compared with data

• Usually stated as a ‘rule’ or a cause-effect relationship.

Research Methods Group

Example

Addition of manure and water will increase initial growth and survival of new mango varieties …

because…

they promote vigorous root growth.First part:

•Easy to test

•Not clear what it adds to understanding

Second part

•Harder to test

•Maybe adds much more to theory

Hypotheses should be…

• Useful– Fill a critical gap in the problem solving

process– Allow you to do something you cannot

currently do

Ocimum populations vary in the level of active ingredients

Variation in active ingredients in different Ocimum populations is large enough to exploit pharmacologically

OR

Highland populations of Ocimum have active ingredient profiles similar enough to coast populations that they may also be used as substitutes

Active ingredients in Ocimum are a plant response to stress so will be found in higher concentrations in more stressed environments

• Logical– Based on current understanding and theory

(social, economic as well as biophysical)– Avoid alchemy

Deep rooted legumes can increase soil N in sandy soils if the dry season water table is shallow.

Fallowing with Myfavourite treespecies will increase soil N on sandy soils.

Research Methods Group

• Testable– Logically– Logistically

Soils can regenerate after serious erosion if left undisturbed for long enough

Changes in soil fertility following forest clearance are caused by changes in soil bacteria populations.

Research Methods Group

• How many…? Where…? What is the difference…?– often local description only

• How…? Why…?– potential to

• generalise to other situations• contribute to the body of scientific knowledge• generate abstraction

Research Methods Group

Most useful hypotheses

• Include ‘How?’ or ‘Why?’

Adoptability of improved fallow varies by gender

Women find improved fallow less adoptable than men because of labour shortages, low priority for maize production and lack of information

Research Methods Group

Expressing the hypothesis

• Words– may get long winded

• Simple models

Soil CPlant C

litter

roots

decomposition

erosion

Research Methods Group

• Empty tables or graphs

Forest Annual monocrops

Soil quality

Time since conversion

Research Methods Group

Time since conversion

Forest

Annual monocrops

Research Methods Group

Part 4. The pitfalls

Research Methods Group

Common problems

• Status of hypothesis already known– researcher not sufficiently familiar with current theory– hypothesis is trivial (‘Species differ…’)

• Study is just a realisation of a phenomenon in a new environment – without hypotheses of why it may be different in that new

environment

• Hypothesis does not take problem forward– Apply the ‘So what?’ test.

• Hypothesis stated as statistical null hypothesis– does not direct design or test– can always be demonstrated with a poor study– often known to be false

Research Methods Group

Common problems

• ‘I am doing an exploratory study. I don’t what to pre-empt results or restrict what I might find by writing hypotheses’– …but then you don’t even know what to

measure!– Hypotheses are there but vague and unstated– Writing them down, however complex, can

only help.

Research Methods Group

In practice• Expect to cycle through problem-objectives-hypotheses several times until it all makes sense• Do ‘thought experiments’. Write down (in tables or graphs) the

sort of results which would confirm or refute your hypotheses• Share your problem-objectives-hypotheses statements with as

many people who may give constructive help as possible.• Don’t be afraid to state hypotheses that challenge common

views – but only if you present a strong case.• Recognise that the finished product of problem-objectives-

hypotheses-design-results-conclusion you read in a paper rarely started out that way as the research was conceived and designed

• Read books on scientific method

Research Methods Group

Part 5. The toolbox

Research Methods Group

Talk

• Feedback

• Constructive criticism

Take initiative.

Research Methods Group

Question

Decision Protocol 2.0 USDA Forest Service

Research Methods Group

Problem and goal tree

DFID. 2002. Tools for development handbook. A handbook for those engaged in development activity.

Research Methods Group

Advanced ideas

Research Methods Group

Underutilised idea:

• Pre-testing hypotheses with quantitative models

Research Methods Group

Outcome Impact on design

1. No relevant model Add model building to objectives

2. Hypothesis not confirmed by model

(a) model assumptions are unrealistic

Add model refinement to objectives

(b) model assumptions are realistic

Examine your assumptions, modify them and produce revised hypothesis3. Hypothesis

confirmed by the model.

Hypothesis is a consequence of current knowledge. There may be more useful objectives for field trials.

Read

Chapter 5 and 6

Research Methods Group

Read

Chapter 3.2

Research Methods Group

Read

Ford, E. David (2000) Scientific Method for Ecological Research.

Cambridge University Press. 564 pp.

ISBN 0 521 66973 1 

Research Methods Group

Peters, Robert Henry (1991) A critique for ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 366 pp. ISBN 0 521 39588 7