Hierarchy of hypotheses or cascade of predictions? A comment on Heger et al. (2013)

• Autores: Farji Brener, Alejandro Gustavo; Amador Vargas, Sabrina
• Año de publicación: 2014
• Idioma: inglés
• Tipo de recurso: artículo
• Materia: Hypothesis; Hiothetic-Inductive Method
• Institución: Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas

The only way to test hypotheses is by evaluating their consequences. Since a hypothesis is an explanation of how nature works, it can be tested through the formulation of outcomes expected assuming the proposed hypothesis is true, and contrasting those predictions with the obtained results. Therefore, hypothesis and predictions are intrinsically different concepts. Hypotheses are ideas; predictions are expected results. Predictions are deduced from hypotheses, but it is unlikely to deduce a hypothesis from a prediction. Regardless of these conceptual differences, ecologists often formulate predictions but erroneously state them as hypothesis (Farji-Brener 2003). We believe that this is the case in the work of Heger et al. (2013). Here, we point out the confusion between hypotheses and predictions, highlight the importance of an adequate use of these terms, and propose the hierarchy-of-expected outcomes approach as an alternative to the hierarchy-of-hypotheses approach.
Fil: Farji Brener, Alejandro Gustavo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Patagonia Norte. Instituto de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Medioambiente; Argentina. Universidad Nacional del Comahue. Centro Regional Universitario Bariloche. Laboratorio de Ecotono; Argentina
Fil: Amador Vargas, Sabrina. University of Texas at Austin; Estados Unidos