A psychology lab publishes a single study showing that classical music played for 10 minutes improves math test scores. A journalist reports: 'Science has proven that classical music makes you smarter.' What is most wrong with this conclusion?
AThe study was not peer-reviewed, so it counts as anecdote rather than data
BA single study is insufficient to establish scientific consensus; converging evidence from multiple replications is required
CMusic and intelligence are unrelated domains, so the study must contain a methodological flaw
DInferential statistics can show correlation but can never speak to academic performance
Scientific consensus requires converging evidence across many independent replications — not a single study, however well-designed. A single result may reflect sampling artifacts, measurement quirks, or chance. The journalist's language ('proven') bypasses the probabilistic and iterative nature of scientific inference entirely.
Question 2 Multiple Choice
A psychologist proposes: 'People sometimes act because of unconscious desires; when they don't act on those desires, they repress them instead.' Why do critics argue this theory is unscientific?
AThe theory deals with unobservable mental processes that cannot be measured
BThe theory predicts contradictory outcomes — both action and inaction — so no result could falsify it
CThe theory was formulated before modern statistical methods existed
DUnconscious processes fall outside psychology's domain and belong to philosophy
A claim that can explain any possible outcome is non-falsifiable — it has no predictive content. If both acting on a desire and suppressing it confirm the theory, the theory cannot be tested or refuted. Option A is tempting but misses the point: the problem is logical (no possible disconfirmation), not merely empirical.
Question 3 True / False
In science, the word 'theory' refers to a well-tested explanatory framework supported by extensive evidence — not a guess or speculation.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: True
This is a critical distinction between scientific and everyday language. 'Gravity,' 'evolution,' and 'learning' are theories in the scientific sense — comprehensive explanatory systems that organize and predict observations across many conditions. The popular meaning of 'theory' as 'mere conjecture' is the opposite of the scientific meaning.
Question 4 True / False
Because the scientific method relies on systematic observation and data, it produces definitive, certain conclusions about the phenomena it studies.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: False
Scientific conclusions are always probabilistic, not certain. A p-value tells you how surprising the data would be under the null hypothesis — it does not certify truth. More importantly, the scientific method is specifically designed for error correction, not certainty: hypotheses, tests, and revisions are structured so that mistakes can be caught and theories updated. Certainty is not the goal; progressive refinement is.
Question 5 Short Answer
Why is falsifiability considered an essential criterion for a scientific hypothesis?
Think about your answer, then reveal below.
Model answer: A falsifiable hypothesis specifies conditions under which it could be proven wrong. Without this, a claim can accommodate any possible outcome — which means it makes no genuine predictions and cannot be tested. Science advances by eliminating bad explanations, and only falsifiable claims can be eliminated. A hypothesis that fits every possible result explains nothing.
The falsifiability criterion (associated with Karl Popper) is what separates scientific claims from metaphysical or rhetorical ones. 'People sometimes feel anxious' is unfalsifiable — there's no conceivable observation that could disprove it. 'Social anxiety scores increase with group size as measured by X scale' is falsifiable: you could collect data and find no such increase. The second is a scientific hypothesis; the first is not.