"The hypothesis becomes forced": Cultural narratives about deductive hypothesis testing influence scientists' self-perception and actions.

Authors

Hailey Fazio, R H Khediri, Nicole M James

Published in

PloS one. Volume 21. Issue 8. Pages e0346386. Epub Aug 21, 2026.

Abstract

There is a rich variety of approaches for generating scientific knowledge. However, deductive hypothesis testing is often considered a defining characteristic of the scientific method. It has long been shown that individuals' perceptions of how science works often do not align with the actual nature of science, which can adversely impact scientific progress and scientific literacy. Here we present an emergent study exploring how postdoctoral scholars whose work involves materials and chemistry describe the role of hypothesis testing in their work. Through a reflexive thematic analysis of 16 interviews, we highlight how participants broadly report valuing hypothesis-based approaches and view them to be a defining characteristic of "good" science. However, simultaneously, a portion of participants find that deductive hypothesis testing is not always the most practical or useful approach in their work. This dissonance between their value of deductive hypothesis testing and their own scientific practices has implications for how participants view themselves and their work. We argue that the cultural master narrative of science emphasizes the use of deductive hypothesis-based reasoning, and that confronting incompatibilities with this narrative requires participants to formulate alternative narratives to rationalize their work in light of the cultural master narrative. This process influences participants' self-perception, their scientific practices, and/or their scientific communication. These findings illustrate that explicit consideration of the nature of science continues to be important in higher education, and motivate further study in this area. These findings also reinforce existing calls for educators and scientists to explicitly normalize the existence of multiple legitimate approaches for generating scientific knowledge.

PMID:
42627876
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 22 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.