Entry 1:
The scientific method is a systematic process consisting of problem-solving and information-gathering through observation, proposing a research question, hypothesis forming, experiment conducting, and concluding if the hypothesis is being supportive (Peace & Duff, 2012).
Experimental research is one method of scientific research where it allows researchers to confirm cause-and-effect relationships by manipulating one variable to determine if changes in one variable cause changes in another variable (A. Rathus, J. Maheu, & G. Veenvliet, 2017).
Some people may argue that scientific or experimental research is just common sense as it occurs too often in our daily life. For example, my cookies have always turned out to be unevenly spread and did not resemble the preferred chewy texture, which has made me wonder why. After researching the possibilities, my hypothesis was the lack of melted butter. My prediction for this hypothesis is after adding the melted butter, the cookies should turn out nicely spread with a chewier texture. I decided to test this theory by experimenting with a recipe that called for this ingredient.
In the experiment, I baked two batches of cookies. The first batch is the control group that uses a normal recipe without the melted butter; the purpose was to compare the result with the other batch of cookies. The second batch is the experimental group, which melted butter, got added. The melted butter is the independent variables which I can control and alter, while the spreading and the texture are the dependent variables that measure the effect of the melted butter, which I do not have control over.
The final results confirmed my hypothesis: as melted butter added, the cookies turned out nicely spread with the perfect chewy texture. It even added the nutty caramel fragrance and flavour from the melted butter! This time, the experiment has been a success.
Entry 2:
The previous scenario was a success. However, not all experiments were fortunate.
My favourite cuisine is Japanese food. Where I used to live in London, England, I often dined at Japanese restaurants and had several favourite places.
Once, there was a new sushi restaurant opened in my area. After hearing many good reviews, I was curious to see if it lives up to my expectation. The hypothesis in this situation is the excellent food quality, hence the raved reviews, and my prediction was to have an enjoyable evening with friends. I decided to make a reservation on one Friday night, hoping this could be my new favourite restaurant.
I arrived with a few friends and waited for over 30 minutes to be seated despite the reservation. The restaurant appeared to be very busy on a Friday evening. There were only three employees waiting tables and taking orders. We waited for a further 30 minutes before our order got taken and another extra 30 minutes before the food arrived. Unfortunately, it did not live up to my expectation. A friend of mine even found a hair in her sushi roll!
In this scenario, the control group is my other favourite restaurants. I dined there many times and my anticipation for the quality, service, and food wise, has always been consolidating. Their standards were used to compare with the new restaurant, which acts as the experimental group. The independent variables are my curiosity and excitement of trying out something new, while the dependent variable is my mood i.e. the disappointment.
Needless to say, I did not return to the restaurant ever since. This time, my hypothesis did not get supported.
Entry 3:
The scientific method is common uses in the world of science. Researchers conduct experimental studies to understand the problems and come up with ways to solve them. Through our Environmental Technician program, we, as students, have carried out many experiments.
Our most recent work is the Test Plot Project; a rehabilitation program that uses vegetation to remove and degrade contaminants from a disturbed site. The experiment involved planting different types of seeds in variable conditions. The objective is to determine which seed or seed mixtures would best flourish on the disturbed site, established a beneficial rate of fertilisation for the sown seed or seed mixture, and assessed seeds viability.
Both experimental and control plots consist of six types of seeds; Indian grass, annual rye, little bluestem, side oats gramma, white clover, and trefoil.
In the experimental plot, each seed received different treatments including fertilisation, soil amendment, and exposure to floods and drought conditions. These treatments are independent variables as we, the experimenters, have control over and can alter.
In the control plot, we planted the exact six types of seeds. However, this group did not receive the same treatment as the experimental plot. Instead, the seeds were laid out in a non-uniform manner without receiving any treatment. The purpose of the control plot is to use as a baseline to compare results with the experimental group.
After the ten weeks, we revisited both plots to make observations and recorded our data. The annual rye seeds had the highest success rate, while the side oats gramma had not germinated. The dependent variables affected by the independent variables, and which we do not have control over, including seed growth rate, vigor, stability, and hardiness.
Overall, we could conclude that the annual rye seeds would be most suitable for the disturbed site.
References:
Rathus, S., J. Maheu, S., & G. Veenvliet, S. (2017). PSYCH.Toronto, ON, Canada: Nelson Education Ltd.
Peace, K., & Duff, J. K. (2012). THINK Social Psychology, First Canadian Edition. Pearson Canada.
Linh's Blog 