Relativity (Time) and the Scientific Method
- A 3-Dimensional Chemo-Phenomenal Model Disclaiming the
by Rodney Chang, April 1977
1. Everything to some degree is interrelated; any two things or events are related.
2. The strength of a relationship between two things varies with time.
3. There is a concurrent interaction of other contingent unidentified things or influences along with the observed "1-to-1" correlation of studied things or phenomena.
4. "Truths" (predictability) may change with time.
5. Change occurs more quickly for certain relationships than for others. (It's like different "truths" have different "shelf lives" during which they can be utilized for man's needs before they once again disappear into the world of uncertain events)
6. There is a continuum of levels of organization among the related things, ranging from relatively simple relationships to very integrated and complex systems.
7. In research we often do not, in attempting to determine correlation between two or more things, select the appropriate compatible level of organization that would show the true relationship. This contributes to "Type I" and 'Type II" errors.
8. Our own cognitive processes (a major instrument of the research process) is highly variable and can influence the results of our observations and experimentation (experimental bias,self-fulfilling prophecy, rejection of the Null Hypothesis)
9. There may be relationships between two events or things but they are undetected by our measuring devices or limtied/improper mode of investigation. Thus such phrases and words as "nonsignificant", "threshold", "non-clinical", "not discriminated", and "no effect" are frequently seen.
10. Two things may be related to each other in different degrees, an analogy would be the single, double and triple bonds of chemistry.
11. Things are constantly changing in size or quantity, and two things may both be increasing together naturally or be the opposite in quantification directionality.
12. Two things are more related (influences each other) to each other at certain times than at other times. An analogy is that of two orbiting planets or a solar ecclipse.
13. The magnitude or rate of change of an object may not be the same as that of another object that one is attempting to correlate it with.
14. In experimentation, sometimes the DV (dependent variable) can have a secondary undetected influence on the IV (independent variable).
15. The qualitative and quantitative aspects of the IV can influence the results of the experiment.
16. Sometimes we attrribute effects observed of the IV mistakenly to that of the DV, when in reality the IV serves as a "catalyst" to break the inhibiting bond of an unusually deactivating confounding variable linked to the DV or subject.
17. The relationship between the DV and the unidentified linked other object may be dynamic, i.e., the strength of the bond may vary with time. Thus a certain powered IV's effect may vary, depending when it is administered to the DV-Other inhibiting variable relationship.
18. Two things that naturally vary together may be construed to have acted in the same direction due to our IV effect (This assumes some gross defect in our handling of the Control group. For example, it may not be exactly the same in character as the experimental group).
19. There may exist a dynamic disequilibrium of effect of two objects or events (or between the IV and the DV) that goes in either direction of relativeness to each other.
20. This dynamic disequilibrium between two things or events can be further complicated by an effect of an inhibiting or facilitating confounding variable (thing).
21. A DV may have a multitude of attached confounding variables. It thus may be difficult in determining (especially in social science research) where the action site of the IV is in producing the observed results (whether observationally or statistically).