How do results in an experiment support or refute a hypothesis?

How do results in an experiment support or refute a hypothesis?

• A. Results align with the predicted outcome or contradict it
• B. Results always confirm the hypothesis regardless of data
• C. The results are irrelevant to the hypothesis
• D. Results are only evaluated by the researcher’s personal perspective

Answer: (A)

The correct answer highlights the relationship between experimental results and the hypothesis being tested. In scientific experimentation, a hypothesis is an educated prediction about the relationship between variables. When results are obtained from an experiment, they can either support the hypothesis if they align with the predicted outcome or refute it if they contradict what was initially expected. This process is fundamental to scientific inquiry, as it allows researchers to draw conclusions based on empirical evidence. For instance, if a hypothesis states that a certain treatment will increase plant growth and results show significant growth, this supports the hypothesis. Conversely, if the treatment leads to stunted growth, it contradicts the hypothesis and suggests that it may need to be revised or that additional factors must be considered. This understanding is vital because it emphasizes that scientific conclusions are drawn from observable data rather than from preconceived notions or personal biases. The other options do not accurately reflect the nature of scientific investigation; hypotheses are not always confirmed by results, results are very relevant to the hypotheses, and evaluations should be objective rather than subjective.

The correct answer highlights the relationship between experimental results and the hypothesis being tested. In scientific experimentation, a hypothesis is an educated prediction about the relationship between variables. When results are obtained from an experiment, they can either support the hypothesis if they align with the predicted outcome or refute it if they contradict what was initially expected. This process is fundamental to scientific inquiry, as it allows researchers to draw conclusions based on empirical evidence.

For instance, if a hypothesis states that a certain treatment will increase plant growth and results show significant growth, this supports the hypothesis. Conversely, if the treatment leads to stunted growth, it contradicts the hypothesis and suggests that it may need to be revised or that additional factors must be considered.

This understanding is vital because it emphasizes that scientific conclusions are drawn from observable data rather than from preconceived notions or personal biases. The other options do not accurately reflect the nature of scientific investigation; hypotheses are not always confirmed by results, results are very relevant to the hypotheses, and evaluations should be objective rather than subjective.