Logical Foundations of Social Science Research

  • Ojelanki NgwenyamaEmail author
Part of the Integrated Series in Information Systems book series (ISIS, volume 34)


In this chapter, I want to review the four inferential logics (1) induction, (2) deduction, (3) abduction, and (4) retroduction which we use to develop the conjectures or hypotheses when doing theory development.


Good Explanation Empirical Testing Scientific Theory General Hypothesis Social Science Inquiry 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Some of the material in this chapter previously appeared in: “Using Decision Tree Modelling to Support Peircian Abduction in IS Research: A Systematic Approach for Generating and Evaluating Hypotheses for Systematic Theory Development,” Information Systems Journal 21:5, 407–440 (2011).


  1. Berger PL, Luckmann T (1991) The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge (No. 10). Penguin, UKGoogle Scholar
  2. Carnap R (1953) Testability and Meaning. In: Feigel H, Broddeck M (eds) Readings in the Philosophy of Science. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, pp 47–92Google Scholar
  3. Day T, Kincaid H (1994) Putting inference to the best explanation in its place. Synth Int J Epistemol Methodol Philos Sci 98:271–295Google Scholar
  4. Fann KT (1970) Peirce’s theory of abduction. Martinus Nijhoff, AmsterdamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Harman G (1965) Inference to the best explanation. Philos Rev 74:88–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hempel CG, Oppenheim P (1965) Studies in the logic of explanation. Philos Sci 15:135–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hempel CG (1965) Aspects of scientific explanation. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Hintikka J (1968) The varieties of information and scientific explanation. In: van Rootselaar B, Staal JF (eds) Logic Methodology and Philosophy of Science III. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 151–171Google Scholar
  9. Lakatos I (1974) Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programs. In: Lakatos I, Musgrave A (eds) Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 91–195Google Scholar
  10. Niiniluoto I (1997) Reference invariance and truthlikeness. Proc Philos Sci 64:546–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Niiniluoto I, Tuomela R (1973) Theoretical concepts and hypothetico-inductive inference. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  12. Peirce CS (1931–1958) Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols 1–8. In: Hartshorne C, Weiss P, Burks A (eds) Harvard University Press, HarvardGoogle Scholar
  13. Popper KR (1957) The aim of science. Ratio 1(1):24–35Google Scholar
  14. Popper KR (1968) The logic of scientific discovery. Harper Torch Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Popper KR (2002) Conjectures and refutations. Routledge Classics Edition, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Popper KR (1972) Objective knowledge: an evolutionary approach. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  17. Thagard R (1978) The best explanation: criteria for theory choice. J Philos 65:76–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Toulmin SE, Barzun J (1981) Foresight and understanding: an enquiry into the aims of science. Greenwood Press, WestportGoogle Scholar
  19. Winch P (1958/1990) The idea of a social science: and its relation to philosophy. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ryerson UniversityTed Rogers School of ManagementTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Faculty of CommerceUniversity of Cape TownCape TownSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations