What is the Definition of deductive research

It refers to specific data obtained from a general theory. The theory leads to predictions about what is likely going on. For example, a hypothesis follows this as it is a theory-based prediction. A problem of deductive research is the biased imposed on people as one is more likely to see what they want to see in order the prove their theory and fail to see other circumstances which could have led to the results obtained. Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_Definition_of_deductive_research#ixzz1UlQpDSfy

Deductive reasoning, also called deductive logic, is reasoning which constructs or evaluates deductive arguments. Deductive arguments are attempts to show that a conclusion necessarily follows from a set of premises or hypotheses. A deductive argument is valid if the conclusion does follow necessarily from the premises, i.e., if the conclusion must be true provided that the premises are true. A deductive argument is sound if it is valid and its premises are true. Deductive arguments are valid or invalid, sound or unsound, but are never false nor true. Deductive reasoning is a method of gaining knowledge. An example of a deductive argument: 1. All men are mortal 2. Socrates is a man 3. Therefore, Socrates is mortal The first premise states that all objects classified as "men" have the attribute "mortal". The second premise states that "Socrates" is classified as a man a member of the set "men". The conclusion states that "Socrates" must be mortal because he inherits this attribute from his classification as a man.

Inductive reasoning, also known as induction or inductive logic, is a kind of reasoning that constructs or evaluates inductive arguments. It is commonly construed as a form of reasoning that makes generalizations based on individual instances. In this sense it is often contrasted with deductive reasoning. However, philosophically the definition is much more nuanced than simple progression from particular / individual instances to wider generalizations. Rather, the premises of an inductive logical argument indicate some degree of support (inductive probability) for the conclusion but do not entail it; that is, they suggest truth but do not ensure it. In this manner, there is the possibility of moving from generalizations to individual instances.

The following is an example of probabilistic reasoning, which is a type of weak induction: 1. 90% of humans are right-handed. 2. Joe is a human Therefore, Joe is probably right-handed. This is an example of Inductive reasoning: 1. 90% of humans are right-handed. 2. Joe is a human Therefore, the probability that Joe is right-handed is 90%. (See section on Statistical Syllogism.) Probability is employed, for example, in the following argument: Every life form we know of depends on liquid water to exist. All life depends on liquid water to exist. However, Induction is employed in the following argument: Every life form that everyone knows of depends on liquid water to exist. Therefore, all known life depends on liquid water to exist. Inductive reasoning allows for the possibility that the conclusion is false, even where all of the premises are true.[1] The previous deduction was a false assertion of inductive reasoning based on the weak inductive conjecture of John Vickers. His example is as follows: All of the swans we have seen are white. All swans are white. The previous statement is an example of probabilistic reasoning, which is a weak type of induction. It is not an example of Strong Inductive Reasoning. A proper example of inductive reasoning is as follows: All of the swans that all living beings have ever seen are white Therefore, All swans are white. Note that this definition of inductive reasoning excludes mathematical induction, which is considered to be a form of deductive reasoning.

Though many dictionaries define inductive reasoning as reasoning that derives general principles from specific observations, this usage is outdated.
[2]

Arguments can be separated into two categories: deductive and inductive. A deductiveargument is one in which it is impossible for the premises to be true but the conclusion false. Thus, the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises and inferences. In this way, it is supposed to be a definitive proof of the truth of the claim (conclusion). Here is a classic example: 1. All men are mortal. (premise) 2. Socrates was a man. (premise) 3. Socrates was mortal. (conclusion) As you can see, if the premises are true (and they are), then it simply isn't possible for the conclusion to be false. If you have a deductive argument and you accept the truth of the premises, then you must also accept the truth of the conclusion; if you reject it, then you are rejecting logic itself. An inductive argument is one in which the premises are supposed to support the conclusion in such a way that if the premises are true, it isimprobable that the conclusion would be false. Thus, the conclusion follows probably from the premises and inferences. Here is an example: 1. Socrates was Greek. (premise) 2. Most Greeks eat fish. (premise) 3. Socrates ate fish. (conclusion) In this example, even if both premises are true, it is still possible for the conclusion to be false (maybe Socrates was allergic to fish, for example). Words which tend to mark an argument as inductive and hence probabilistic rather than necessary include probably, likely, possibly and reasonably. It may seem that inductive arguments are weaker than deductive arguments because there must always remain the possibility of their arriving at false conclusions, but that is not entirely true. With deductive arguments, our conclusions are already contained, even if implicitly, in our premises. This means that we don't arrive at new information at best, we are shown information which was obscured or unrecognized previously. Thus, the sure truth-preserving nature of deductive arguments comes at a cost. Inductive arguments, on the other hand, do provide us with new ideas and thus may expand our knowledge about the world in a way that is impossible for deductive arguments to achieve. Thus, while deductive arguments may be used most often with mathematics, most other fields of research make extensive use of inductive arguments.