INTRODUCTION

The scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. The Clover and Balsley defines the scientific method as: "scientific method is a step-by-step procedure following the logical process of reasoning." The chief characteristic which distinguishes the scientific method from other methods of acquiring knowledge is that scientists seek to let reality speak for itself, supporting a theory when a theory's predictions are confirmed and challenging a theory when its predictions prove false. Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, identifiable features distinguish scientific inquiry from other methods of obtaining knowledge. Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter. Theories that encompass wider domains of inquiry may bind many independently derived hypotheses together in a coherent, supportive structure. Theories, in turn, may help form new hypotheses or place groups of hypotheses into context. Scientific inquiry is generally intended to be as objective as possible in order to reduce biased interpretations of results. Another basic expectation is to document, archive and share all data and methodology so they are available for careful scrutiny by other scientists, giving them the opportunity to verify results by attempting to reproduce them. This practice, called full disclosure, also allows statistical measures of the reliability of these data to be established.

History of scientific method

The history of scientific method is a history of the methodology of scientific inquiry, as differentiated from a history of science in general. The development and elaboration of rules for scientific reasoning and investigation has not been straightforward; scientific method has been the subject of intense and recurring debate throughout the history of science, and many eminent natural philosophers and scientists have argued for the primacy of one or another approach to establishing scientific knowledge. Despite the many disagreements about primacy of one approach over another, there also have been many identifiable trends and historical markers in the several-millennia-long development of scientific method into present-day forms. Some of the most important debates in the history of scientific method centre on: rationalism, especially as advocated by Ren Descartes; inductivism, which rose to particular prominence with Isaac Newton and his followers; and hypothetico-deductivism, which came to the fore in the early 19th century. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a debate over realism vs. antirealism was central to discussions of scientific method as powerful scientific theories extended beyond the realm of the observable, while in the mid-20th century some prominent philosophers argued against any universal rules of science at all.

ESSENTIALS OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD

The scientific method is preferred in research, as it is based on certain sound postulates or principles. The main requisites of scientific method are: 1. Reliance on Empirical Evidence: Scientific method involves a systematic process. Solution to a problem is found not on the basis of intuition or imagination. The scientific method involves collection of information through observation and experimentation. The validity of the information is scrutinized systematically, and then the information is analysed properly. Conclusion are drawn on the result of analysis. The result of analysis is based on empirical evidence and not on imagination or on ones own blind belief or impressions. 2. Use of Relevant Concepts: The scientific method makes use of relevant concepts. Concepts are logical constructs or abstractions created from sense impressions, percepts and experiences. Concepts are the symbols representing the meaning we hold of facts. The facts are the things that actually exist. To deal with facts, we make use of concepts with specific meanings. Concepts bring clarity and understanding of the facts. 3. Commitment to Objectivity: The scientific method is objective in nature, whereas, the arbitrary method is subjective. Objectivity involves forming a judgement upon facts unbiased by personal impressions. Objectivity is the willingness and the ability to examine facts in a systematic manner. The conclusion drawn should not vary from person to person. Through scientific method, the researcher provides an argument, which is as true for each and every individual.

4. Ethical Neutrality: Scientific method is based on ethical neutrality. Science aims at making true and appropriate statements about facts. For a researcher, truth should be the primary objective. As Schroedniger remarks science never imposes anything, science states. Science aims at making true and adequate statements about its objects. 5. Generality: Scientists are concerned with the commonality of a series of events and not with isolated events. Ernest Greenwood states that the scientist is constantly aware of his obligation to discover under the surface level of diversity, the thread of uniformity. Around a discovered uniformity, a logical class is constructed; about the class and its observed pattern, a descriptive generalization is formulated. It is to be noted that one should avoid generalizing on insufficient or incomplete and unrelated data. This can be done by collecting large amount of data, and by using comparisons and control groups. 6. Verifiability: The conclusions drawn by the researcher must be verifiable. A researcher should make known to others as to how he arrived at the certain conclusions. When others verify his conclusions under the same conditions, then they are accepted as correct. Such verification through replication by others may either confirm established conclusions of the researcher or modify them or even invalidate them. Therefore, the researcher or scientist must expose his methods and conclusions to critical scrutiny. Logical Reasoning Process: The scientific method involves the logical process of reasoning. The reasoning process is used for arriving at a conclusion or for drawing an inference from the finding of a particular research work. For instance, in a survey on Brand Loyalty on Ready- made Garment, it was inferred that young females are less brand loyal as compared to young males. The logical reasoning process consists of induction and deduction.

Limitations of scientific method

There are certain limitations or difficulties in the use of scientific method in social sciences. The main limitations are as follow: 1. Problem of accuracy: Social sciences deals with human beings- their behaviour, and social life. The human behaviour cannot be predicted with accuracy. This is because; human behaviour is subject to change depending upon the situation, the nature of the person, and other factors. Therefore, scientific method in social sciences cannot predict with accuracy the behaviour of human beings. 2. Problem of uniformity: Human behaviour is not uniform. Different persons behave differently under certain situation. In other words, all people do not behave in the same manner in similar situation. Also one may behave differently in similar situations at different times. Therefore, scientific method in social sciences has the problem of generating uniformity in the behaviour of different human beings under similar situations. 3. Problem of bias: The scientific method in social sciences is affected by the problem of bias of the researcher. Some researchers may be biased in using the scientific method. They may draw conclusions subjectively depending upon their likes, dislikes, feelings and emotions. In other words, there is a problem of objectively in using the scientific method in social sciences as compared to physical sciences 4. Problem of sampling: In social sciences, the researcher uses a particular sample of respondents to understand the behaviour of human beings in a given situation. However, there are problems in sampling. In other words, the selected sample of

respondents may not represent the universe, and as such, even if the study conducted with the use of scientific method, may not bring objective results. 5. Problem of respondents: In social sciences, scientific method may not provide objective responses from the respondents. Some respondents may deliberately give wrong responses so as to please the researcher or to get away with the interviews as quickly as possible. Even in the case of observation, the respondents may be conscious of being observed, and therefore, they may behave differently than otherwise. 6. Problem of verification: The physical phenomena may be known directly through senses, but the social phenomena are known only symbolically through words representing such social phenomena, i.e., culture, customs, tradition, values, and other subjective aspects of social life. Therefore, it is difficult to verify the conclusions drawn from social science research. 7. Problem of laboratory experiments: In most physical sciences, it is possible to undertake controlled laboratory experiments. However, it is difficult to perform controlled laboratory experiments in the case of social science research, although to a limited extent laboratory experiments are possible in social sciences as well. As social sciences develop, a number of human problems may be hopefully be brought within the reach of laboratory experiments. Problem of segregating cause effect relationship: In social science it is difficult to segregate the cause effect relationship. In other words, it does not make sense to know which is the cause, and which is the effect.

Types of Research Used in the Scientific Method

There are two basic types of research associated with the scientific method. 1) Quantitative Research Quantitative research is based on collecting facts and figures. This type research is common in biology. 2) Qualitative Research Qualitative research is based on collecting opinions and attitudes. This type research is common in the social sciences.

Steps in the Scientific Method

1) Identify a Problem or Question Identify a problem to be solved or a question to be answered. For example, we know that plants require nitrogen fertilizer. If a crop is not growing very well, we might wonder if the lack of growth is due to inadequate nitrogen. Or, the crop may be growing, but we might wonder if we can stimulate the crop to growth even better if we try a new type of nitrogen fertilizer. 2) Review Literature and Gather Information Determine as much information about the topic as possible. Are there published studies that have investigated the same or similar topic? You do not want to conduct a research project that has already been done. You want to add to the current body of knowledge. The best approach is to conduct an exhaustive review of the scientific literature. 3) Formulate Hypothesis, Null Hypothesis or Research Objective Develop a hypothesis to be tested. A hypothesis is a statement that the experiment will attempt to prove. An example of a hypothesis would be: Increasing the level of nitrogen fertilizer will increase plant growth. The purpose of the experimentation would be to prove the hypothesis. Sometimes one develops a null hypothesis. A null hypothesis is a statement that the experiment will attempt to disprove. Sometimes one can never prove a hypothesis, so one attempts to disprove all possible null hypotheses. An example of a null hypothesis would be: Nitrogen fertilizer does not affect plant growth.

More often that not, researchers in biology develop a research objective, such as: To determine the effect of increasing nitrogen fertilizer on plant growth. 4) Design Experiment An experiment is designed to test the hypothesis, null hypothesis or satisfy the research objective. This is the critical component of the scientific method. The design of the experiment is what separates the scientific method from testimonials, general observations and assumptions. The scientific method uses the following characteristics to assure creditability. a) Unbiased The experiment must be designed and conducted without bias. The experiment is designed such that one treatment is not favored over another. Sometimes the treatments are blind, and the researcher does not know which experimental units received which treatments. This is very common in human medical research. In addition, the treatments must be random. For example, the experimental units are randomly selected to receive the various treatments, and the treatments are randomly arranged in the area where the experiment is to be conducted. Finally, the experimental units, for example the plants, must be as uniform as possible. b) Control group There must always be a control. A control is a group of experimental units that do not receive the treatment. For example, in a nitrogen fertilizer study, the control group would receive no nitrogen. Sometimes the control must be a standard or normal condition. For example, if plants are growing in the soil where there is natural nitrogen present, then the control group would be the plants grown with the standard or normal amount of nitrogen present in the soil.

c) Replicates Each of the treatments is applied to a group of experimental units, for example a group of plants. Single experimental units are never used. Usually, a minimum of 5 uniform experimental units receive each treatment. However, sometimes many more experimental units must be used to collect reliable data. The data collected on the individual experimental units are averaged in step 6) Organize and Analyse data. d) Repeat experiment The experiment must always be repeated to make sure the same, or very similar results, are obtained. 5) Collect data The experimental units must be measured in order to determine the effect of the treatments. For plants, measurements may be of growth rate, size, colour, flowering, yield, internal physiological factors or constituents, or what ever is needed to determine the response to the treatments. 6) Organize and Analyse data The data must be organized and analysed. The data is averaged and organized into lists, tables, figures and/or graphs. 7) Interpret data a) Identify trend(s) The data is studied to identify trends, to determine which treatments caused what types of responses, to determine which treatments are better or worse than others, etc.

b) Determine significant differences Statistical analysis is used to determine which treatments are different from the others. Oddly enough, in research you can never make a statement that two treatments are equal, only that they are not significantly different! c) Draw conclusions Finally, conclusions are drawn to support or not support the hypothesis, null hypothesis or research objective. 8) Communicate results This is the most important part of the research. The research has no value if the results are not communicated with the scientific community, ones colleagues, students and/or the public. The research becomes creditable only if it is reviewed by and accepted by ones scientific peers in the form of a refereed publication. A refereed publication is a scientific article that is submitted for publication in a refereed scientific journal. The article is sent to several scientists (the referees) for an anonymous review, and they recommend whether or not the article should be published in the refereed journal. If accepted for publication, the results and conclusions from the study have withstood the highest level of scientific scrutiny and are deemed acceptable by the scientific community. After the results are published in the refereed journal, then it is desirable to publish the findings in popular articles, industry journal, etc. Deductive reasoning is a basic form of valid reasoning. Deductive reasoning, or deduction, starts out with a general statement, or hypothesis, and examines the possibilities to reach a specific, logical conclusion. The scientific method uses deduction to test hypotheses and theories.

INDUCTION
Induction is the creative part of science. The scientist must carefully study a phenomenon, and then formulate a hypothesis to explain the phenomenon. Scientists who get the most spectacular research results are those who are creative enough to think of the right research questions. Natural sciences (physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) are inductive. Evidence is collected. The Scientific Method is applied. Start with specific results and try to guess the general rules. Hypotheses can only be disproved, never proved. If a hypothesis withstands repeated trials by many independent researchers, then confidence grows in the hypothesis. All hypotheses are tentative; anyone could be overturned tomorrow, but very strong evidence is required to overthrow a "Law" or "Fact". Specific -> General Here's an example of induction: Suppose I have taken 20 marbles at random from a large bag of marbles. Every one of them turned out to be white. That's my observation - every marble I took out was white. I could therefore form the hypothesis that this would be explained if all the marbles in the bag were white. Further sampling would be required to test the hypothesis. It might be that there are some varicoloured marbles in the bag and my first sample simply didn't hit any. Incidentally, this is one case where we could prove the hypothesis true. We could simply dump out all the marbles in the bag and examine each one.

When followed:
The induction method is followed when new facts are studied, new truth are uncovered and new generalisations are formed based on a research work. For example, in a motivational study it was proposed to test the hypothesis- the provision of good working conditions motivates the workers, which in turn increases labour productivity. For this purpose, workers were divided into two groups- test group and control group. In the test group, the working conditions were improved significantly and in the control group, the working conditions remained the same as before. After a certain period, the productivity of workers in the test group was compared with that of control group, in order to find out the impact of the working conditions on the labour productivity. It was found that the productivity improved in the test group, which proves the hypothesis that good-working conditions motivates the workers to enhance productivity.

Essential Conditions:
According to Clover and Balsley, four conditions are essential for valid induction. These are: 1. Accuracy: Observations must be correctly performed and recorded, and data collected should be accurate. Errors in observation, experiments or interviews and faulty recording of the information can affect the conclusions drawn. 2. Representative: Observations must cover representative cases drawn from a specific universe. For instance, to conduct a survey on brand loyalty among young females for a particular product category, then there should be proper representation of young females comprising of college going females, young working females, graduates, non-graduates, and other representations. Appropriate sampling technique can be used for this purpose, such as stratified random sampling. 3. Appropriate Sample Size: Observations must cover an adequate number of cases. The sample size must be large enough to make it representative so as to obtain reliable results. 4. Proper Conclusions: Conclusions must be confined to interference drawn from the findings. The conclusions must be drawn only after proper analysis of the collected data relating to a particular study. They should not be generalized to apply to cases not covered in the sample. For instance, if the study is conducted to know the brand loyalty of young females for a particular product, then the conclusions drawn from such a study cannot be applied to young males, or elderly ladies, and so on, as they are not covered in the sample.

Strengths and weaknesses of inductive method

Inductive research approaches are more widely used than Deductive by the scientific community, but they both have their strength and weaknesses. Inductive method:

Strengths: The inductive method produces concrete conclusions about nature that are
backed by a variety of observational evidence. When one of an inductive arguments premises are perceived as false, other observational evidence can be added to the premises to save the argument, this is not the case with deductive reasoning.

Weaknesses: The inductive method produces conclusions that go beyond what their
premises warrant. In other words, inductive arguments take a limited amount of observations to provide a universal conclusion, which could still be false. For example, someone observes 10,000 dogs and finds that they all have flees, then inductively concludes that all dogs have flees. This is a situation where overwhelming observational evidence (10,000 dogs have flees) points to an inductively reasoned false conclusion (All dogs have flees).

Types of induction: T. Theodorson and A. Theodorson have identified two basic types of induction- enumerative and analytic. Enumerative induction is the most common form of induction used in social science research. It involves generalizations from samples and the generalizations are usually derived through the analysis of data. For instance, if in a number of cases, it is observed that young females are not brand loyal in respect of readymade garments, then it can be concluded that all young females are not brand loyal in respect of readymade garments. Induction by enumeration gives us only probable conclusion. Analytic Induction involves case-by case analysis of specific facts. It is a process of establishing a universal proposition by exhaustive enumeration of all the instance of the type covered by the universal proposition. Therefore, analytic induction can be called as scientific induction. The scientific induction gives us definite conclusions. Donald Cressey has stated a systematic procedure in the case of analytic induction: Define the phenomenon to be explained. Formulate hypothesis to examine the phenomenon. Study or observe a case to determine whether or not hypothesis fits in the case. If the hypothesis does not fit the case, either reformulate the hypothesis or redefine the phenomenon precisely, so that the case is excluded. Study a small number of cases to attain practical certainly; but whenever a negative case disproving the explanation is discovered, reformulate the hypothesis. Continue the procedure of examining cases, reformulating the hypothesis and redefining the phenomenon, until a universal relationship is established.

For purposes of proof, examine cases outside the area circumscribed by the definition to determine whether or not the final hypothesis applies to them.

Merits: Induction provides the universal premise and is helpful in finding out material truth. It points out the relativity of generalizations. It indicates that a particular generalization is valid in certain situation. It is scientific in nature. Some of the important laws or principles of physical and social science have been developed through the use of inductive approach. Inductive generalizations are precise and accurate as they are based on observed facts and realistic foundation.

Demerits The collection of data for induction is a complex job. This method requires high degree of competence on the part of the researcher. Induction is not useful without deduction. Without deduction, induction produces only a mass of unrelated facts. It is a time consuming and