1.2
The Scientific Method
Chemistry is an empirical science. Scientists often pose questions to understand the chemistry in everyday life and seek answers to these questions. T…
The scientific method is a systematic approach followed by all scientific disciplines. It follows six main steps - making an observation, asking a question, building a hypothesis, conducting experiments, the interpretation of data, and finally, the derivation of a conclusion.
The scientific method starts with an observation and a question to help understand that observation. For example, the French chemist Antoine Lavoisier observed the phenomena of combustion. He formulated a question to understand what happens when something is burned. Where does the matter go?
The third step in the scientific method is building a hypothesis - a tentative explanation for the observation in question, that can be tested. In response to his question of “Where does the matter go?”, Lavoiser hypothesized that in a chemical reaction, the matter was neither created nor destroyed. A good hypothesis is also testable and falsifiable. A testable hypothesis is one that makes predictions that can be confirmed by experimentations or observations. It is falsifiable when it can be refuted by experimentation.
The fourth step in the scientific method is experimentation and data collection. Experiments are observations or measurements conducted under controlled environments such as temperature, pressure, or volume. This step investigates how well the real world fits that predicted by the hypothesis.
Some experiments and observations are qualitative - describing how a process happens. Others are quantitative - measuring or quantifying something about the process.
Lavoisier tested his hypothesis by heating mercury in a closed setting. This led to the formation of a reddish substance. His experiments were quantitative, so he carefully recorded the mass of reactants and the products in the closed system as well as separately.
The fifth step is data interpretation and analysis - evaluating whether the results support or refute the hypothesis and if further experimentation is needed. Lavoisier observed that the total mass of the jar and its contents before and after the reaction remained the same, although the mass of the red product was greater than that of the original mercury.
The final step is to draw a logical conclusion and decide whether to accept or reject the hypothesis. If the results support the hypothesis strongly, then it is accepted. It may also be put to further testing or refined by asking new questions, and conducting new experiments.
From his experiments, Lavoisier concluded that since the total mass of the jar remained unchanged during the reaction, the oxygen in the jar had combined with the mercury to form the new product, now known as mercury(II) oxide. This conclusion strongly supported his hypothesis on the conservation of mass - that the total mass of the objects remains unchanged during the process of burning.
However, if a hypothesis is disproved, then scientists may formulate a new hypothesis by taking cues from the failed experiments, and start afresh.
Even though we see the scientific method as a series of steps, new information or ideas might cause a scientist to back up and repeat steps at any point during the process. Thus, the scientific method is an iterative process.
View the full transcript and gain access to JoVE Core videos
Q1: What are the six main steps of the scientific method?
The scientific method consists of six systematic steps: making an observation, asking a question about that observation, building a hypothesis as a tentative explanation, conducting experiments to test the hypothesis, interpreting the data collected, and finally drawing a logical conclusion. This structured approach is followed across all scientific disciplines to investigate phenomena and validate explanations through evidence.
Q2: What makes a hypothesis testable and falsifiable?
A testable hypothesis makes predictions that can be confirmed or refuted through experimentation or observation. It is falsifiable when experimental results can disprove it, allowing scientists to reject or modify the hypothesis based on evidence. Both qualities are essential for a hypothesis to be scientifically valid and useful in guiding research.
Q3: How did Antoine Lavoisier use experimentation to test his hypothesis about combustion?
Lavoisier heated mercury in a closed system and carefully recorded quantitative measurements of reactant and product masses. He observed that the total mass of the jar and contents remained unchanged before and after the reaction, even though a reddish substance formed. This controlled experiment provided evidence supporting his hypothesis on the conservation of mass during chemical reactions.
Q4: What is the difference between qualitative and quantitative observations in experiments?
Qualitative observations describe how a process happens without numerical measurements, such as noting color changes or physical transformations. Quantitative observations involve measuring or quantifying specific aspects of a process, like recording mass, temperature, or time. Lavoisier's experiments were quantitative because he precisely measured the mass of reactants and products in his combustion studies.
Q5: Why is the scientific method considered an iterative process?
The scientific method is iterative because new information or unexpected results may cause scientists to revisit and repeat earlier steps at any point during investigation. If a hypothesis is disproven, scientists formulate new hypotheses based on failed experiments and restart the process. Even when results support a hypothesis, further testing or refined questions may lead to additional cycles of experimentation and analysis.
Q6: How do controlled conditions in experiments relate to testing a hypothesis?
Controlled experiments are conducted under carefully managed conditions such as temperature, pressure, or volume to isolate the effect of specific variables being tested. By controlling the number of variable factors, scientists can determine whether results support or refute the hypothesis. This controlled approach ensures that observed changes result from the tested factor rather than uncontrolled external influences.
Q7: What should scientists do when experimental results support a hypothesis?
When experimental results strongly support a hypothesis, scientists may accept it and subject it to further testing to answer new questions or refine understanding. The hypothesis may also be subjected to measurement accuracy and precision standards to validate findings. Acceptance does not end investigation; instead, it opens pathways for deeper exploration and potential discovery of related phenomena.