The Four Different ResearchTheories & Differences and Similarities between theory and hypothesis - Assignment Example

? The Four Different Research Theories & Differences and Similarities between theory and hypothesis Number The Four Different Research Theories & Differences and Similarities between theory and hypothesis Abstract The assignment is about a scenario that someone has been hired to work as a consultant by a local police commissioner to offer one’s expertise on research on criminal justice. On the other side, the assignment would be for educational information for the police captains who want to come up with a new city wide crime prevention strategy. In addition to the key information that will be discussed are the main differences between inductive, deductive, axiomatic and grounded research theories. In addition to that, there are similarities and differences between the hypothesis and theories that will also be discussed. An explanation of theories that is more valid than the others will be given as well as a definition and explanation of what variables are in this respect. Finally, the importance of the variables to the theoretical schemes will be discussed with types of variables. Introduction In the process of criminal research there are many things to consider in teaching people on criminal justice research. However, to be able to understand the plan in construction new crime prevention strategy city wide there are major points that require to be discussed. The main points that will be tackled for educational information will include definition of theories of inductive, deductive, axiomatic as well as grounded research theories (Ireland, Berg & Mutchnick, 2010). In addition, looking at all these theories, one can be considered to be more valid than the rest. There are a number of theories introduced in the criminal justice system and they all have differences and similarities that that make them separate entities in the field of criminal justice. Knowing the theories is one main point but being able to define the variables and their importance as theoretical schemes components is crucial to providing learning information to police captains. Key Differences between the Research Theories In this section, a generalization of the four theories will be given to gain a basic understanding of each one. Deductive reasoning takes general information and gives it a particular instance. An example of this kind of reasoning can be dogs sleep twelve hours a day. Understanding that this may be true for one dog, it can be concluded that that is also true for all dogs based on the fact that they have the same biology. Inductive reasoning involves taking well detailed facts and applying them to general principles. An example could be that all cows are spotted. Another example could be that every day the sun rises in the morning and sets in the evening. It can be said to be a simplified version of facts such as location, speed and viewpoints (Ireland, Berg & Mutchnick, 2010). Grounded theory is a methodology that is systematic involving coming up with a theory from data that is gathered and available. It is mainly used when doing qualitative research, even though it can be applicable for quantitative data. In other words it is the scientific method that has been reversed. One starts by collecting data in a variety of ways first then from the data gathered a hypothesis is proposed. Using the axiomatic research theory, the system is made up of any set of axioms or postulate in coming up with a proposition that has not been demonstrated or proven but is considered to be self evident or is known to be true without any proof. From this all or some of the axioms can be used together to come up with logically derived theorems. In other words the data is taken to be factual without having to necessarily prove it (Hagan, 2009). Which theory is more valid? Looking at the four theories the grounded theory can be considered to be more valid based on the methodology it uses. Its apparent ability to come up with theories by use of an inductive approach has put it forward as very relevant in many criminological researches. It inductively draws from the phenomenon that it represents and covers four central criteria: understanding, generality, fit and control (Strauss and Corbin 1990). Fit implies the theory fits the data that is substantive; understanding implies the theory can be comprehensible to every one who is involved in the research; generality means the theory can be applicable in a number of contexts; and control means the theory can provide control in regard of the action to the phenomenon. It provides a systematic methodology involving several steps which are used to ground or relate the theory to the authenticity of the phenomenon being studied. This is in contrast with hypothetico-deductive methodology where generation of theories is from cyclical testing and refining of hypothesis that has been previously constructed. In grounded theory, generation of theory is from systematic examination of the situation being studied. An important element of grounded theory is its theoretical sensitivity, which is the personal quality of the one researching and relates the subtlety and meaning of data. This is vital in criminal research where the data gathered is very sensitive. It is the creative aspect of the theory and involves the one researching working to obtain expertise and experience making the theory generated to be conceptually dense. All methods for data collection and analysis are systematic. Differences and similarities between theory and hypothesis Beyond that their significance is paramount and descriptive of the methodology that is vital to the scientific process. The two terms are originated at almost the same time and much of their derivation is similar and they cite Greek as one of the recent origins. The term hypothesis is often used to refer to the explanation of things that happen. In some instances, it can refer to just a simple guess. In other cases it can be well developed propositions that are created to give explanation to the details behind workings of occurrences or occurrence (Senese, 1997). One particular description states that discretely that a hypothesis refers to the antecedent to a conditional proposition. The hypothesis is tested and formed within the scientific methodology. Someone may come up with the hypothesis while still doing the observation, but that may as well be considered premature. This act of making observation might actually present an opportunity for disproval of a hypothesis. But still the hypothesis is necessarily defined well and is inclusive of details which allows for the process of accurate testing and in many cases differentiates it from a theory. The tern theory is of a rather scientific nature, and less limited. Some applications may refer to explanations of happenings; and some actually include application as referencing a simple guess. Theory when used refers to a field of study that is aimed at the conceptual and general, as compared to the practical aspect and the application of the same subject. Within the scientific methodology, using theory is like having a working understanding or model of what is happening (Champion, 2006). The theory is always developed in the process of observation (in a setting that is non-experimental). Though, it is developed further by experimentation and hypothesis testing, a theory will always be a theory. By virtue of its existence its validity is maintained. A theory is dismissed once it is disproved. Variables and their importance as components of theoretical schemes Criminal justice researchers use an experiment to find cause and effect relationships in the phenomenon being researched (Bayens & Roberson, 2010). In other words, the research is designed so that any change or changes to one factor causes something else to change in a predictable manner. The changing factors are called variables. In simple terms, a variable is any element, condition or trait that can be there in a variety of types or amounts. A criminal justice research often has three types of variables: dependent variable, independent variable and controlled variable. An independent variable is the one being changed or adjusted by the researcher. To ensure that the researcher gets a fair result, a good criminal justice research should only have one independent variable. Every time the independent variable is changed by the scientist, he/she record and observes what happens. The researcher then focuses his or her attention to the dependent variable to observe its response to the changes he or she made to the independent variable. This new value for the dependent variable is as a result of and depends on the independent variable’s value (Hagan, 2009). Criminal just research also has controlled variables. These are quantities that the researcher wants to remain constant throughout the research, and they must be carefully observed just like the dependent variables. The variables must be kept constant for the outcome of the research to be fair because different outcomes depend on the controlled variable. Most researches have more than a single controlled variable to cater for any error that could be committed. Some researchers refer to these variables as constant variables because they remain unchanged throughout. Conclusion In the process of criminal research there are many things to consider in teaching people on criminal justice research. However, to be able to understand the plan in construction new crime prevention strategy city wide there are major points that require to be discussed. Understanding the four research theories is important. Deductive reasoning takes general information and gives it a particular instance. Grounded theory is a methodological and it involves coming up with a theory from data that is gathered and available. Inductive reasoning involves taking well detailed facts and applying them to general principles. In axiomatic theory the system is made up of any set of axioms used in developing a proposition that has not been demonstrated. The grounded theory’s ability to develop theories by use of an inductive approach has put it forward as very relevant in many criminological researches. A theory and hypothesis are similar only by virtue their significance to the methodology that is vital to the scientific process otherwise they are different because a hypothesis is tested and formed within the scientific methodology whereas a theory is of a rather scientific nature and less limited. The factors that keep changing in the research are referred to as variables and they are important because they are the major determinants of the research outcome (Bayens & Roberson, 2010). References Bayens, G. & Roberson, C. (2010). Criminal Justice Research Methods: Theory and Practice. : CRC Press. Champion, D. (2006). Research methods for criminal justice and criminology. : Pearson/Prentice Hall Hagan, F. (2009). Research Methods in Criminal Justice and Criminology. : Prentice Hall. Ireland, C., Berg, B. L., & Mutchnick, R. J. (2010). Research methods for criminal justice and the social sciences:Practice and applications. Boston: Prentice Hall.  Senese, J. (1997). Applied research methods in criminal justice. : Nelson-Hall Publishers Read More