6

Models, Hypotheses,

Theories, and Laws

All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

Anecdotes do not make a science.

—Shermer, 1997

The terms model, hypothesis, theory, and laws are encountered often when
reading literature in scientific journals. So what do they mean and where do they
fit in the scheme of things?
We can start with describing an experiment. An experiment is the study of an
event under controlled conditions. It usually consists of a theory and/or a hypoth­
esis, participants, independent variables (i.e., things you manipulate or vary to
assess their effects), dependent variables (i.e., outcomes you measure), and a
conclusion about whether the hypothesis was supported by the data.
A well-designed experiment is capable of informing about:

• whether the events we observe are real and not just due to the product of
our imagination, wishful thinking, and so forth. (Empirical evidence)
Copyright 2002. Psychology Press.

• whether what we have observed can be applied to other people, places,

and conditions. (Generalizable)
• whether what we have observed is a genuine effect. (Replicable)

76
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/4/2022 1:33 AM via HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIV
AN: 129648 ; Carmel Lum.; Scientific Thinking in Speech and Language Therapy
Account: s3890005.main.ehost
 MODELS. HYPOTHESES. THEORIES. AND LAWS 77

All this information gleaned from experiments can be collated, and it might be
possible to represent the information in the form of a model.

MODELS
The purpose of a model is to represent and possibly explain various aspects of a
phenomenon. A model is typically a simplified, schematic abstraction of what it
represents. No one actually expects a model to represent how things really work.
Models are shorthand ways to represent what one is talking about to aid the commu­
nication of ideas. In speech and language therapy, many of the models we use are
psychological and linguistic models. They provide a schematic framework on which
to hang what one knows about a particular process in speech processing. They are
useful devices for communicating what is known. There are, however, differences
between various types of model. Some models are produced without the support of
empirical evidence: anyone can draw a model to represent what one is thinking.
Other models are produced only on the basis of available empirical evidence.
In general, no one really expects a model to be an actual representation of the
real thing. For example, a plastic model of an airplane is intended to represent a
real airplane, but no one expects the model to be an exact reproduction of the
actual airplane, with movable parts and an engine. An architect's model is usu­
ally a miniature construction of the actual house to be built, but without working
parts. Models can appear in several forms, and they are almost always abstract
representations of what is represented.
For example, Fig. 6.1 shows a plastic model of how human vocal folds move
on phonation.
A model can also be a formula that defines voice production in terms of how
much air supply is available as a function of time:

Sometimes, models are expressed as syllogisms. Syllogisms capture a particu­

lar form of reasoning or argument. For example,

Increased muscle tension causes increased vocal fold.

Vocal fold adduction results in voice production adduction.
Therefore, increased tension must increase certain aspects of vocal production.

Computer programs can model (or simulate) how the vocal mechanism works
with various physiological events. Figure 6.2 shows a computer-based simulated
model of the larynx.
Another type of model often used to describe language and speech processing is
an information-processing model (Patterson & Schewell, 1987). A box-and-arrow

EBSCOhost - printed on 9/4/2022 1:33 AM via HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
 78 CHAPTER 6

Fig. 6.1. A model of the larynx.

Fig. 6.2. Computer-based simulation of the larynx.

EBSCOhost - printed on 9/4/2022 1:33 AM via HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
 MODELS, HYPOTHESES, THEORIES, AND LAWS 79

FIG. 6.3. A simple process model for the recognition, comprehension,

and production of spoken and written words. (Source: Patterson, K., &
She well, C. (1987). Speak and spell: Disociations and word-class effects.
In M. Coltheart, R. Job & G. Sartori (Eds.), The cognitive neuropsychology
of language (pp. 273-294). NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.)

diagram is used to represent the different components and the direction of informa­
tion flow between these components (see Fig. 6.3).

What Must a Model Have?

A model can be simple or complex (i.e., showing many features) and still be a
representation of the same object or process. What it includes depends on what
the designer wants it to have and wants to emphasize.
Models are very useful. They are a very good source for generating hypotheses or
predictions. Then enable one to plan an experiment that will test a hypothesis or pre­
diction. Models can guide the hypotheses or predictions formulated in experiments.

HYPOTHESES

Anderson (1971) defined a hypothesis as a statement, either descriptively or

explanatory, that has not been adequately tested. It can also be thought of as a
hunch about something. Polgar and Thomas (2000) refered to hypotheses as

EBSCOhost - printed on 9/4/2022 1:33 AM via HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
 8Q CHAPTER 6

statements that state the nature of the relationship between two or more sets of
observations or measurements. It is important that all the terms and referents in a
hypothesis be clearly articulated to minimize ambiguity about the intended
meaning. In other words, the terms in the hypothesis must be operationally de­
fined. (Further explanation is provided in Chapter 7.)

Clinical Example
John, age 5 years, was tested and found to have delayed language development. As his
medical history showed, he was often ill and suffered ear infections. The clinician hy­
pothesised that chronic ear infections were likely to be responsible for John's failure
to achieve language levels commensurate with his chronological age.

Research Example
There is a hypothesis that the age at which a child learns a word has an effect on how
easily he or she is able to reproduce this word after sustaining brain damage as an
adult. The investigator hypothesizes that the degree of picture naming accuracy will
increase as the age of acquisition ratings for the pictures become smaller.

Null and Alternative Hypotheses

In scientific reasoning, the investigator does not set out to prove that hypotheses
such as the ear infection and age-of-acquisition hypotheses are correct. These
are called the alternative hypotheses. It is important that an investigator
(i.e., a scientific investigator) display both skepticism and open-mindedness to
new ideas. Rather than try to prove the alternative hypothesis (i.e., that ear infec­
tions impede language development in children), the investigator sets out to
demonstrate that the null hypothesis is true (i.e., that there is no difference be­
tween the two conditions). This means there is no difference between children
with and children without ear infections in their levels of language development.
In the case of the age-of-acquisition hypothesis, the null hypothesis states that
the patients will show no differences in naming pictures with high or low age of
acquisition ratings. When findings from a study do not allow an investigator to
reject the null hypothesis, we say that the results failed to support the null hy­
pothesis (i.e., no difference). We do not then say that the findings proved the ex­
perimental, or alternative, hypothesis. This is because the same set of results
might be accounted for by two separate theories. Both hypotheses or theories
cannot be true at the same time.
So we have experiments and models to generate hypotheses for experimental
testing. Where does all this information lead? In time, a bank of data will accu­
mulate from various experiments. Reviewers may observe that many studies on
the same issue conducted by independent researchers have reported similar

EBSCOhost - printed on 9/4/2022 1:33 AM via HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
 MODELS. HYPOTHESES, THEORIES. AND LAWS 81

results. Someone may then attempt to formulate a theory or a law which states
that some outcomes will always be observed under certain conditions. One of the
problems in practice is that very few studies are replicated. This is partly due to
the fact that after one replication study, many journal editors and readers would
find it uninteresting to read yet another study that reports the same results as
another, already published, study. Furthermore, grant-funding bodies seem to
tend to fund research of new ideas rather than replication studies.

Statistical and Theoretical Hypotheses

With statistical hypotheses, every time a researcher obtains a result, it is neces­
sary to test whether the obtained result has happened by pure chance or whether
it reflects a true effect of the event under study. This is why we see many statisti­
cal procedures called "tests" (e.g., t test, McNemar test, chi-square test). These
statistical procedures test the probability of a given result arising by chance.
There is no guarantee that you will get the same results every time you conduct a
study. Sometimes, your findings might erroneously say that there is a true effect
(or difference) when in reality these results happened to arise just by chance.
Sometimes, the reverse may occur: There is a true effect, but the finding erro­
neously states that there is no effect.
Testing a statistical hypothesis is based on testing your result against a set of
(already worked out) probabilities for when such a result might happen by
chance. A statistical hypothesis runs something like this: We know the calculate
values (e.g., t values or chi-square values) of a hypothetical distribution. We
hypothesize that the result from the analysis (e.g., t statistic) comes from the
same distribution of values that occur when there is no effect happening in the
study (null hypothesis). This hypothesis states that there is no significance differ­
ence between my derived value and the values found in the hypothetical distribu­
tion. If I find, however, that my result occurs in less than 5% of the values in this
distribution, then my result is significantly different from the values in the hypo­
thetical distribution. My result must then have a higher probability of represent­
ing values from a different distribution (i.e., a different population). A real effect
has been observed and the probability of my result arising by chance alone is less
than 5%. We therefore have to reject the null hypothesis.
Theoretical hypotheses are familiar to most people. These are hypotheses
couched in language that refers to some idea about how certain variables are re­
lated. For example, I hypothesize that individuals with high IQ scores will show
a higher speed of processing than people with low IQ scores. As you can see, sta­
tistical hypotheses are used to verify theoretical hypotheses. For example, the
following are a theoretical and a statistical hypothesis:

• Individuals with high IQs have higher processing speed than individuals
with low IQs. (Theoretical hypothesis)
• People with high IQs do have higher speeds of processing. (Observed result)

EBSCOhost - printed on 9/4/2022 1:33 AM via HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
 82 CHAPTER 6

If the finding from study is due to chance, then there will not be a statistically
significant difference between this study's finding and what could have occurred
by chance. If a statistically significant difference is observed, then this finding re­
flects a true effect (or real difference) in this sample (statistical hypothesis).

THEORIES

A theory is a universal statement that allows a large number of observations to

be summarized (e.g., evolutionary theory, germ theory). Chalmers (1999) sug­
gested a comparison between two types of statements (i.e. observational state­
ments and universal statements) to clarify this distinction:

• Observational statements are statements that refer to specific events or

particular sets of circumstances at a specific time.
• Universal statements are statements that refer to all events of a certain
kind that occur at all places and at all times.

Example
That stick, partially immersed in water, appears bent. Mr. Smith struck
his wife. The litmus paper turned red when immersed in the liquid. The in­
tonation of Mrs. Jones's speech has altered after 20 years of profound
deafness. (Observational statements)
All planets, wherever they are, will always move around a sun. A pro­
foundly deaf person who is deprived of auditory feedback will always
show a departure from a normal intonation pattern. (Universal statements)

According to Chalmers (1999), universal statements are the laws and theories
that inform scientific knowledge.
What is a good theory? A good theory accounts for all existing data, predicts
new observations, and is testable. An example of an untestable theory is Freud's
theory of the unconscious. This theory states that human behavior is influenced
by unconscious thoughts that are not known to us. These unconscious thoughts
can be of a sexual, an aggressive, or a repressive nature, and nothing that is said
or done can be without meaning. The problem with this theory is the circularity
of its argument:

Question: Why did the President George Bush say, "We have sex ... set
plans" during a speech?
Answer: What he said was driven by his repressed thoughts about sex
in the White House.

EBSCOhost - printed on 9/4/2022 1:33 AM via HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
 MODELS, HYPOTHESES, THEORIES, AND LAWS 83

Question: How do we know these thoughts are what you claim they
represent?
Answer: We don't. These thoughts are unconscious.

Another unfalsifiable account is astrology because it makes predictions so

vague as to be irrefutable (e.g., you will travel this month; you will have conflict
with your colleagues) The claims that behavior is determined by unconscious
thoughts and that personality is influenced by the alignment of astrological
bodies are examples of untestable theories.

LAWS
After a time, the bulk of accumulated research evidence gathered from a variety
of disciplines about conditions and events can lead to a formulation of a law. A
law states that there is a regularity in the way something works, regardless of
who, what, or where this event occurs. The formulation of a theory can emerge
as a result of a scientist having a unique insight or as a result of being informed
by the results of previous research and theories.
Laws are statements that express regularities. As hypotheses gain increasing
empirical support, it sometimes becomes possible to subsume the research
findings under a law. Laws do not address specific individual events. They are
statements that are thought of as laws of nature or natural laws in the physical
sciences. This type of statement says that a particular phenomenon will always
occur if certain conditions are met.
In physics, one single law, the law of gravity, explains the falling and move­
ment of all sorts of objects anywhere in the world. In psychology, Thorndike's
law of effect states that learning is strengthened each time a response is followed
by a satisfying state of affairs. So if hitting the TV makes the picture stand still,
the viewer is likely to hit the TV. Similarly, a clinician trying a new technique is
more likely to try it again if the first patient she tried it on acted favorably toward
her when she used it. The Yerkes-Dodson law (also called the inverted U law)
states that the best performance is obtained when the level of arousal is optimal
for a given task. The optimal level varies for different tasks. For example,
arousal needs to be high for a gross motor task but low for a fine motor task. For
example, a high level of arousal is needed to play football, whereas a lower level
of arousal is needed to thread a needle. It would be quite difficult for someone
coming straight off a football field to be able to thread a needle without shifting
down his arousal state.
All scientific endeavors aim to arrive at laws. A law is, in effect, a single rule
that can be generalized to all events. Laws serve to provide a parsimonious
description of all observations.

EBSCOhost - printed on 9/4/2022 1:33 AM via HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
 84 CHAPTER 6

FURTHER READING

Breakwell, Hammond, & Fife-Schaw (2000) gives an account on theory in easy to understand terms.
Coolican (1996) presents a section on the types and meaning of hypotheses.
Richards (1987) is a useful source on laws and theory.
Schmidt & Lee (1999) offers a chapter on laws and theory regarding the topic of motor performance.

GRADUATE READING
Giere (1997) describes authentic accounts of early scientific discoveries.

EBSCOhost - printed on 9/4/2022 1:33 AM via HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use