What is a hypothesis? Brief definition. Hypothesis: definition of concept and types
Much knowledge is the original hypotheses that were put forward by scientists to confirm or test them. If we consider the concept of a hypothesis, we can understand that it is an assumption or guess of a person who is considering a specific phenomenon or characteristic of an object. A hypothesis is a statement that a person makes about an unstudied phenomenon. Since anything can be studied, there are several types of hypotheses.
When a person does not know something, but constantly encounters a certain phenomenon or object, he wants to study it. This is quite normal for the human mind, which feels calm only when the phenomena around it are clear to it and have logical proof.
To begin to study something, a person must notice something that is not clear to him, and then begin to make assumptions about why this or that phenomenon happens, how it develops, how it is eliminated, what it is aimed at, etc. A person first puts forward his thoughts on account of what has not yet been studied. After which the process of proving or refuting the proposed idea occurs. Now a person must confirm that his opinion turned out to be correct and always works, or refute it, find special conditions for the occurrence of this or that phenomenon, its variability, etc.
A hypothesis is the first step on the path to knowledge. Even if a hypothesis is refuted, it still remains in the history of science, since there were certain prerequisites for its emergence. It is these premises that can then become evidence for another hypothesis that arises in a particular area.
The online magazine site refers to the wisdom of scientists: no knowledge can be formed without a hypothesis, and not every hypothesis is absolutely proven. In other words, a person needs to doubt even the knowledge that he possesses, since in the world one can find a refutation of an already proven phenomenon.
Even exact sciences do not fully prove certain phenomena. Undoubtedly, the knowledge that children acquire in schools has its own evidence. But one should not believe in their exclusive truth and immutability. Any knowledge can be questioned and refuted by other evidence.
Do not trust knowledge unconditionally. Doubt the knowledge you receive from books, magazines, and scientific literature. Moreover, test the knowledge you receive in action. The easiest example of how people are “stuffed” with false knowledge are history textbooks of your country and other countries. The longer you live, the more new information you receive and evidence that what you previously knew from history in your school years is not true.
Use exactly the same approach with other knowledge. For example, all women have more than once encountered the fact that modern creams, shampoos and ointments for body and hair care do not give the effect that is written on the jars. There are many folk remedies that supposedly should also help maintain youth and beauty. But they are often ineffective. Accordingly, they give you false information, that is, they deceive you.
Even knowledge that is scientific should be treated with doubt and caution. Undoubtedly, it is good to know all the techniques of manipulation when communicating with other people. Some of them really work. But we should not forget that there are people who do not give in to manipulation or see manipulation. By “resistance” to manipulation we mean that in fact these manipulations do not work at all. For example, it is believed that you should not sit opposite your interlocutor during communication, as this creates a position of confrontation. But if you interview many people, it turns out that they never felt that they were being attacked, just because they sat opposite them.
Knowledge is useful and important to all people. But if you don’t want to become a puppet in the hands of people who benefit from programming you to do something, doubt the information you receive. They tell you something, take it into account, but check the knowledge you have acquired. After all, much of what people are told is untrue, designed to distract people, misdirect them, intimidate them, or cause certain reactions that are actually unwarranted. Doubt what you know until you test your knowledge in practice. Check to understand what knowledge is correct and what is false.
What is a hypothesis?
But let’s return to where all knowledge begins – to the hypothesis. Scientists first put forward a hypothesis in order to later make it knowledge or a disproved hypothesis. What it is? A hypothesis is a statement in the form of a guess or assumption that requires explanation. It arises in any area of human life where a person does not yet have knowledge and cannot explain specific phenomena. A hypothesis is put forward to address an object, phenomenon or specific characteristic, cause of occurrence or elimination, which then requires evidence and study.
At first, a hypothesis is not true or false. It is necessary to conduct experiments, look at the phenomenon in natural conditions, trace all the changes, find all the strong evidence or refutations in order to come to the conclusion that the hypothesis turns into true knowledge or a false assumption.
If a hypothesis has been refuted, it is not forgotten, but remains in the history of the study of a particular phenomenon. The reason for this approach is that a false hypothesis is based on real and proven factors, it just needs to be changed, adjusted, supplemented so that it becomes true knowledge. Hypotheses don’t just arise in a person’s head, so refuted knowledge requires revision, adjustment and bringing it to the truth.
The process is quite simple:
- First, an idea appears in a person’s head – a hypothesis. He assumes or explains in his own way a certain phenomenon.
- Then research and experiments are carried out to prove or disprove the hypothesis.
- Conclusions are drawn based on the results obtained.
Even if a hypothesis has been refuted, it still becomes an aid to putting forward a new hypothesis. It is simply corrected, supplemented, modified.
If a hypothesis has been proven, it turns into knowledge. However, not every knowledge is absolute. It is possible to find refutations that cast doubt on true knowledge. Therefore, even knowledge may turn out to be false in some (not all) situations.
The hypothesis could be:
- Public or private.
- Superficial or deep.
- Refer to specific characteristics or consider the subject as a whole.
- Belong to one field of knowledge or combine several sciences.
A hypothesis is scientific and theoretical knowledge that requires proof. A hypothesis is put forward by a scientist who encounters certain phenomena or objects, behind which he notices specific characteristics that do not yet have an explanation. Where a person has questions, hypotheses appear. Only if scientists have hypotheses as knowledge that needs to be proven or disproved through research and experimentation, then among ordinary people, ideas and thoughts that arose in the head at the individual level are often perceived by a person as true knowledge, insight, knowledge of the true, so he does not even refutes his idea, considering it correct in all versions.
Knowledge is first hypothetical, that is, just an assumption that explains causes, connections, characteristics and phenomena. Then comes a period of numerous studies and experiments, observations and other processes that should confirm or refute the hypothesis. If the hypothesis turns out to be incomplete, then it is corrected. If it has no basis at all for its occurrence, then it is completely abandoned.
Types of hypotheses
There are two types of hypothesis:
- Theoretical – when it is necessary to eliminate contradictions and attribute a hypothesis to a specific theory.
- Empirical – when the truth of a hypothesis needs to be proven.
- Descriptive – when the characteristics of a specific object are considered. It also includes an existential hypothesis - consideration of the existence of something, for example, the hypothesis of the existence of Atlantis.
- Explanatory – when connections and reasons for the development of specific phenomena are considered.
- General – when phenomena affecting life as a whole are considered.
- Particular - the characteristics of specific objects or even one object are considered.
- Working – when a hypothesis is just being put forward and is at the stage of refutation or proof.
- A hypothesis based on reality.
- Scientific and experimental.
- Experimental.
- Statistical – parameters that are used for evidence or research are considered.
Be in doubt as a result?
In the modern world, the best strategy for building relationships is to constantly doubt the veracity of your interlocutor. This is especially true for people whom you have just met. It is better not to trust others than to believe in their boundless kindness and end up in an unpleasant situation.
A modern person can easily deceive his interlocutor. People learn this from childhood, when they understand that their parents react in a certain way to certain words. The child gets used to telling his parents what they want to hear, which develops into the habit of communicating with others in the same way.
You may be no exception and notice a habit of resorting to lies in certain cases. For conscious and unconscious reasons, a person begins to lie, realizing what he is doing. Even in this case, he does not stop, because lies bring him more benefits than the truth.
Everyone lies or is simply wrong. There are people who deceive and understand that they are doing something wrong, which is why they later repent. And there are those who lie and do not feel remorse for what they did. Know that almost everyone you interact with is lying, especially if you have only known each other for a short time.
One significant feature of when a person does tell the truth should be noted. Whatever the truth, no matter how it hurts, it evokes respect from the interlocutor to whom it is spoken. You may be offended for hearing the truth, but at the same time you will have respect for the person for not being afraid to reveal the truth, no matter how bitter it may be, and jeopardize your relationship. Everyone reacts differently to the truth: some people are grateful for what they were told, others accuse the speaker of all sins. Telling the truth can sometimes become dangerous, especially for relationships. Those who don't take risks and don't say it don't get respect. Surprisingly, the bitter truth is a means of subconscious respect for the one who told it.
This statement can be judged to be true or false. This is precisely what is a necessary link in the development of science.
In this publication we will define the concept of “hypothesis”, and also talk about some shocking hypotheses of the modern world.
Meaning
A hypothesis (from the Greek hypothesis, which means “foundation”) is a preliminary assumption that explains a certain phenomenon or group of phenomena; may be associated with the existence of an object or item, its properties, as well as the reasons for its occurrence.
A hypothesis itself is neither true nor false. Only after receiving confirmation does this statement become true and cease to exist.
In Ushakov’s dictionary there is another definition of what a hypothesis is. This is a scientific unproven assumption that has a certain probability and explains phenomena that are inexplicable without this assumption.
Vladimir Dal also explains in his dictionary what a hypothesis is. The definition says that this is a guess, a speculative (not based on experience, abstract) position. This interpretation is quite simple and brief.
The no less famous dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron also explains what a hypothesis is. The definition given in it is related only to the system of natural sciences. According to them, this is an assumption that we make to interpret phenomena. A person comes to such statements when he cannot establish the causes of a phenomenon.
Stages of development
In the process of cognition, which consists in making assumptions, there are 2 stages.
The first, which consists of several stages, is the development of the assumption itself. At the first stage of this stage, the position is advanced. Most often this is a guess, even partly unfounded. At the second stage, with the help of this conjecture, previously known facts and those that were discovered after the appearance of the conjecture are explained.
To be must meet certain requirements:
1. It should not contradict itself.
2. The extended position must be checkable.
3. It cannot contradict those facts that do not belong to the field of hypothesis.
4. It must comply with the principle of simplicity, that is, it should not contain facts that it does not explain.
5. It must contain new material and have additional content.
At the second stage, the development of knowledge occurs, which a person receives with the help of a hypothesis. Simply put, this is its proof or refutation.
New hypotheses
When talking about defining what a hypothesis is, we should pay attention to some of them. The modern world has achieved enormous success in the field of knowledge of the world and scientific discoveries. Many previously put forward hypotheses were refuted and replaced by new ones. Below are some of the most shocking hypotheses:
1. The Universe is not an infinite space, but a material entity created according to a single law. Scientists believe that the Universe has a certain axis around which it rotates.
2. We are all clones! According to Canadian scientists, we are all descendants of cloned creatures, artificially created hybrids grown from a single cell in a test tube.
3. Health problems, reproductive problems, as well as decreased sexual activity are associated with the appearance of synthetic substances in food.
Thus, a hypothesis is not reliable knowledge. This is just a prerequisite for its appearance.
from Greek hypothesis - basis, assumption) - in psychology, a component of the thinking process that guides the search for a solution to a problem through the tentative addition (extrapolation) of subjectively missing information, without which the result of the solution would not be possible. received. G. may relate to this result itself or to the conditions on which it depends. An important component of solving a problem are statements regarding the principle (“idea”) of the solution.
The use of logic in thinking ensures its selectivity (selectivity), as opposed to a complete logical enumeration of options at each segment of the solution. The more creative the solution to a problem is, the greater the place it takes up. For some problems, the solution of which does not contain sequential logical transformations, the development and verification (test for truth) of logics are the only form of solution.
The difference between the psychological understanding of logic and the logical one is that in logic, logic is considered from a perspective. their falsity or truth when justifying one or another scientific theory, in other words. the result of thinking and the methods of obtaining it (methods of proof and refutation), and in psychology G. is studied as a mechanism of this process, as the movement of thought itself.
The central psychological problem posed in the first studies of g. and which has not lost its relevance is how the process of “generating”, the emergence of certain g. is carried out. No less significant is the question of the “strength” of a g. - the subjective probability of its truth, which, as a rule, does not coincide , with objective probability (arising from objective information on the basis of which the G. is built).
Modern studies of the process of geometric formation show that, regardless of the completeness of the conditions of the problem, if its solution is unknown to the subject, the search area is for him in the beginning. decisions are uncertain. Therefore, he builds the broadest, most general plans in relation to the area in which a solution should be sought in order to establish for himself the direction of the search. The functions of such groups are not necessarily performed by categorical concepts or “general judgments.” "Representative" of the general G. m. b. specific, particular G., but if it is unsuitable, the subject sharply changes the direction of the search and does not put forward homogeneous G. If the G. is confirmed in relation to the search area, instead of general G. the person puts forward more specific ones that do not go beyond the boundaries of this area, and then specific ones . However, this process does not have the character of a consistent judgment about the volume of a group: in solving a problem, there is a continuous alternation of more general and more specific groups, and the more complex the task, the more complex their hierarchy.
The processes of operating with G. depend on the person’s experience and knowledge related to the task, the subjective attitudes of the individual, the quality of self-regulation of thinking, in particular its flexibility or inertia.
In G.'s operation, intuitive and discursive processes of thinking interact; the process of putting forward a hypothesis can be carried out intuitively, without awareness of its logical foundations (see Intuition), and its verification occurs in the form of logical discourse analysis. The opposite is also possible: G. itself is a rational component of the decision, and its verification is based on an intuitive conclusion. At the initial stages of solving a complex problem, intuitive logics are usually put forward, making it possible to outline the search area; at the final stages of the solution, the role of logically sound and controllable logics increases; in solving the problem, a transition is made from plausible reasoning to evidence; Without proof, the problem cannot be considered finally solved. See also Heuristics.
A hypothesis is a natural form of development of knowledge, which is a reasonable assumption put forward in order to clarify the properties and causes of the phenomena under study.
characteristic features of the hypothesis:
(1) A hypothesis is a universal and necessary form of knowledge development for any cognitive process.
(2) Constructing a hypothesis is always accompanied by putting forward assumptions about the nature of the phenomena under study, which is the logical core of the hypothesis and is formulated in the form of a separate judgment or a system of interrelated judgments.
(3) The assumption that arises when constructing a hypothesis is born as a result analysis of factual material, based on a synthesis of numerous observations. An important role in the emergence of a fruitful hypothesis is played by the intuition, creativity and imagination of the researcher.
Types of hypotheses
In the process of knowledge development, hypotheses differ in their cognitive functions and the object of study.
1. By functions in cognitive process, hypotheses are distinguished: (1) descriptive And (2)explanatory.
(1)Descriptive hypothesis - this is an assumption about the inherent properties of the object under study. It usually answers the question:
Descriptive hypotheses can be put forward to identify composition or structures object, disclosure mechanism or procedural features of its activities, definitions functional characteristics of the object.
(2)An explanatory hypothesis is an assumption about the reasons for the emergence of the object of research.
2. Based on the object of study, hypotheses are distinguished: general and private.
(1) O A general hypothesis is an educated guess about natural connections and empirical regularities.
(2) A particular hypothesis is an educated guess about the origin and properties of individual facts, specific events and phenomena. If a single circumstance served as the cause of the emergence of other facts and if it is not accessible to direct perception, then its knowledge takes the form of a hypothesis about the existence or properties of this circumstance.
Along with the terms “general” and “particular hypothesis” the term is used in science "working hypothesis".
A working hypothesis is an assumption put forward at the first stages of the study, which serves as a conditional assumption that allows us to group the results of observations and give them an initial explanation.
§ 4. Methods of proving hypotheses
There are three main ways: deductive justification of the assumption expressed in the hypothesis; logical proof of the hypothesis; direct detection of hypothesized objects.
(1)Direct detection of the desired objects. The most convincing way to turn an assumption into reliable knowledge is direct detection at the expected time or in the expected place of the desired objects or direct perception of the assumed properties.
(2)Logical proof of versions. Versions that explain the essential circumstances of the cases under investigation are transformed into reliable knowledge through logical justification.
Logical proof of a hypothesis, depending on the method of justification, can take the form indirect or direct evidence.
Indirect proof proceeds by refuting and eliminating all false versions, on the basis of which the reliability of the only remaining assumption is asserted.
The conclusion proceeds in the form of a denying-affirming mode of separation-categorical inference.
Direct proof of a hypothesis proceeds by deriving from the assumption various consequences that follow only from this hypothesis and confirming them with newly discovered facts.
In the premises of a simple categorical syllogism, the middle term can take the place of subject or predicate. Depending on this, there are four types of syllogism, which are called figures (Fig. 52).
Rice. 52
In the first figure the middle term takes the place of the subject in the major and the place of the predicate in the minor premises.
In second figure- place of the predicate in both premises. IN third figure- the place of the subject in both premises. IN fourth figure- the place of the predicate in the major and the place of the subject in the minor premise.
These figures exhaust all possible combinations of terms. The figures of a syllogism are its varieties, differing in the position of the middle term in the premises.
The premises of a syllogism can be judgments of different quality and quantity: general affirmative (A), general negative (E), particular affirmative (I) and particular negative (O).
Varieties of syllogism that differ in the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the premises are called modes of simple categorical syllogism.
For example, the major and minor premises are generally affirmative judgments (AA), the major premise is a generally affirmative, the minor is a general negative judgment (AE), etc. Since each premise can be any of four propositions, the number of possible combinations of premises in each figure is 2 4, i.e. 16:
AA EA IA OA AE (EE) IE(OE)AIEI(II) (01) AO (EO) (10) (00) Obviously, in the four figures the number of combinations is 64. However, not all modes are consistent with the general rules of the syllogism. For example, modes enclosed in brackets contradict the 1st and 3rd rules of premises,
modeI.A. does not pass through the first and second figures, since it contradicts the 2nd rule of terms, etc. Therefore, by selecting only those modes that are consistent with the general rules of the syllogism, we obtain 19 modes, which are called correct. They are usually written down along with the conclusion:
1st figure: AAA, EAE, All, EY
2nd figure: EAE, AEE, EY, AOO
3rd figure: AAI, IAI, All, EAO, OAO, EY
4th figure: AAI, AEE, IAI, EAO, EY
Special rules and cognitive significance of syllogism figures
Each figure has its own special rules, which are derived from the general ones.
Rules for the 1st figure:
1. The major premise is a general proposition.
2. The minor premise is an affirmative proposition.
Let us first prove the 2nd rule. If the minor premise is a negative proposition, then according to the 2nd rule of premises the conclusion will also be negative, in which P is distributed. But then it will be distributed in the larger premise, which must also be a negative judgment (in an affirmative judgment P is not distributed), and this contradicts the 1st rule of premises. If the major premise is an affirmative proposition, then P will not be distributed. But then it will not be distributed in conclusion (according to the 3rd rule of terms). A conclusion with undistributed P can only be an affirmative judgment, since in a negative judgment P is distributed. This means that the minor premise is an affirmative judgment, since otherwise the conclusion will be negative.
Now let's prove the 1st rule. Since the middle term in this figure takes the place of the subject in the greater and the place of the predicate in the minor premise, then, according to the 2nd rule of terms, it must be distributed in at least one of the premises. But the minor premise is an affirmative proposition. This means that the middle term is not distributed in it. But in this case it must be distributed in a larger premise, and for this it must be a general judgment (in a particular premise the subject is not distributed).
Let us exclude combinations of premises IA, OA, IE, which contradict the 1st rule of the figure, and combinations AE and AO, which contradict the 2nd rule. There remain four modes AAA, EAE, All, EA, which are correct. These modes show that the 1st figure gives any conclusions: generally affirmative, generally negative, particular affirmative and particular negative, which determines its cognitive significance and wide application in reasoning.
The 1st figure is the most typical form of deductive reasoning. From a general position, which often expresses a law of science, a legal norm, a conclusion is drawn about a separate fact, a single case, a specific person. This figure is widely used in judicial practice. Legal assessment (qualification) of legal phenomena, application of the rule of law to an individual case, sentencing for a crime committed by a specific person, and other judicial decisions take the logical form of the 1st figure of the syllogism.
For example:
All persons deprived of their liberty (M) have the right to be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person (P) H. (S) deprived of their liberty (M)
H.(S) has the right to be treated humanely and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person (R)
Rules for the 2nd figure:
1. The major premise is a general proposition.
2. One of the premises is a negative judgment.
The second rule of the figure is derived from the 2nd rule of terms (the middle term must be distributed in at least one of the premises). But since the middle term takes the place of a predicate in both premises, one of them must be a negative proposition, i.e. a proposition with a distributed predicate.
If one of the premises is a negative proposition, then the conclusion must be negative (a proposition with a distributed predicate). But in this case, the predicate of the conclusion (the larger term) must be distributed in the larger premise, where it takes the place of the subject of the judgment. Such a premise must be a general judgment in which the subject is distributed. This means that the larger premise must be a general proposition.
The rules of the 2nd figure exclude combinations of premises AA, IA, OA, IE, AI, leaving the modes EAE, AEE, EA, AOO, which show that this figure gives only negative conclusions.
The 2nd figure is used when it is necessary to show that a separate case (a specific person, fact, phenomenon) cannot be subsumed under a general position. This case is excluded from the number of subjects spoken of in the major premise. In judicial practice, the 2nd figure is used to conclude that there is no corpus delicti in this particular case, to refute provisions that contradict what is stated in the premise expressing the general position.
For example:
An instigator (P) is a person who incites another person to commit a crime (M) H. (S) is not recognized as a person who induces another person to commit a crime (M)
H.(S) is not an instigator (P)
Rules for the 3rd figure:
1. The minor premise is an affirmative proposition.
2. Conclusion - private judgment.
The 1st rule is proven in the same way as the 2nd rule of the 1st figure. But if the minor premise is an affirmative proposition, then its predicate (the minor term of the syllogism) is not distributed. A term not distributed in the premise cannot be distributed in the conclusion. This means that the conclusion must be a private judgment.
Giving only partial conclusions, the 3rd figure is most often used to establish partial compatibility of features related to one subject. For example:
Inspection of the scene of the incident (M) has one of its tasks
detection of traces of a crime (P)
Inspection of the crime scene (M) - investigative action (S)
Some investigative actions (S) have one of their tasks to detect traces of a crime (P)
In the practice of reasoning, the 3rd figure is used relatively rarely.
4th figure syllogism also has its own rules and modes. However, deriving a conclusion from the premises based on this figure is not typical for the natural process of reasoning. For example:
Taking a hostage (P) is a crime against public safety (M)
Crime against public safety (M) - a socially dangerous act provided for by the Special Part of the Criminal Code (S)
Some socially dangerous acts provided for by the Special Part of the Criminal Code (S) are hostage-taking (P)
This line of reasoning seems to be somewhat artificial; in practice, conclusions in such cases are usually drawn from the first figure:
Crimes against public safety (M) - socially dangerous acts provided for by the Special Part of the Criminal Code (R)
Hostage taking (S) is a crime against public safety (M) _____
Hostage taking (S) is a socially dangerous act provided for by the Special Part of the Criminal Code (P)
Since the course of reasoning based on the 4th figure is not typical for the thinking process, and the cognitive value of the conclusion is small, we do not consider the rules and modes of this figure.
The rules of syllogism are formulated for syllogistic conclusions that do not include distinguishing judgments as premises. If there are such premises, then such syllogisms do not obey some general rules, as well as special rules of figures.
Let's look at the most common cases.
When formulating a hypothesis, it is necessary to take into account such an important characteristic as testability, which presupposes the availability of adequate methods or techniques for testing this hypothesis.
Types of hypotheses.
Depending on the degree of generality, scientific hypotheses can be divided into general, specific, and individual.
A general hypothesis is a scientifically based assumption about the causes, laws and patterns of natural and social phenomena, as well as the patterns of human mental activity. General hypotheses are put forward with the aim of explaining the entire class of phenomena described, deducing the natural nature of their relationships at any time and in any place.
A particular hypothesis is a scientifically based assumption about the causes, origin and patterns of some objects isolated from the class of objects of nature, social life or human mental activity under consideration. Particular hypotheses find application both in natural science and in social and historical sciences. Particular hypotheses are also those assumptions that are used in forensic investigative practice, because here we have to make conclusions about individual events, people’s actions, individual facts causally related to the crime.
A version of a particular hypothesis is a version.
A version is one of many possible explanations or interpretations of some fact, phenomenon, or event that does not coincide with others.
A single hypothesis is a scientifically based assumption about the causes, origin and patterns of individual facts, specific events or phenomena. The doctor builds individual hypotheses during the treatment of a particular patient, selecting medications and their dosage individually for him.
In the course of proving general, specific and individual hypotheses, people build working and scientific hypotheses.
A scientific hypothesis explains the patterns of development of natural phenomena, society and thinking and must meet the following requirements:
- * be the only analogue of a process, phenomenon;
- * give an explanation to as many circumstances as possible that are associated with this phenomenon;
- * be able to predict other phenomena that are not among those on the basis of which it was originally built.
A working hypothesis is an assumption put forward, as a rule, at the first stages of research. The working hypothesis does not directly pose the task of elucidating the actual causes of the phenomena under study, but serves only as a conditional assumption that allows us to group and systematize the results of observations into a specific system and give a description of the phenomena that is consistent with the observations.
The specificity of the working hypothesis is its conditional and thus temporary acceptance. It is extremely important for the researcher to systematize the available factual data at the very beginning of the investigation, rationally process them and outline ways for further searches. The working hypothesis performs the function of the first systematizer in the research process.
In forensic investigative practice, when explaining individual facts or a set of circumstances, a number of hypotheses are often put forward that explain these facts in different ways. Such hypotheses are called versions.
The knowledge obtained with the help of particular versions serves as the basis for constructing, concretizing and clarifying the general version that explains the criminal act as a whole. In turn, the general version makes it possible to outline the main directions for putting forward private versions regarding the yet unidentified circumstances of the case.
According to their functional purpose, hypotheses can be divided into types.
informational hypotheses
instrumental hypotheses.
Hypotheses of an informational nature are usually formulated at the initial stage of research (or are typical for novice researchers) and are dependent on one variable. In other words, the experimenter who begins the study makes an assumption about how and in what way the stated goal of the study can be achieved. (If you do this... you'll get the effect...)
Moving on to the formulation of the multifactorial content of the hypothesis, the researcher transforms its content into an instrumental character, which already presupposes the construction of a system of measures and control influences that ensure the achievement of the research goal.
According to the mechanism of formation, hypotheses can be divided into simple (inductive and deductive) and complex (inductive-deductive).
An inductive-deductive hypothesis includes elements of the two previous types of hypotheses and contains a sequence of procedures for synthesizing theoretical fragments - assumptions into new theoretical knowledge, based on the analysis of which a prediction of previously unknown aspects and properties of the object being studied is deduced.