D Coda

This chapter reported scientists' opinions of the hypothesis and how it enters into their written work. It was a preliminary attempt to add to the discussions focused on the hypothesis which, thus far, have been remarkably data-free.

While there is ambivalence and disagreement among respondents, the hy­pothesis testing mode remains dominant in both scientific thinking and sci­entific practice. The survey respondents identified twice as many advantages as disadvantages with it, implying that they see hypotheses in a favorable light. They acknowledged its pervasiveness throughout their careers and rated its contributions to science highly. The respondents also saw Discovery Science as an important complement to hypothesis-based science, but I found no evidence that scientists feel that they have to choose between them; indeed, all four modes of scientific procedures that I asked about were well- represented in modern prac­tice, although thus far Big Data has not made a major impact on the bioscientists that I queried. There was consensus that major changes in official policies, either publishing or governmental, are unwarranted.

Two important findings from my review of the neuroscience literature in top journals was that most work is hypothesis-based, but that the hypothesis is rarely explicitly stated. Instead, the hypothesis is left unstated in an implicit form that reveals itself in the organization, structure, and conclusions of the work. The fact that the hypothesis is so often left unstated partly explains the confusion about it and its roles in science.