Research + 6 step evaluation

There are 2 step of this project. Approved Step 1 then you can start Step 2. Must have posted ANSWER in 5/31 

Example of the 6 step evaluation is uploaded 

 STEP 1 

The first step for this project is to find a topic of interest to you which I will also approve of. I will approve of any topic which meets these criteria:

(a) it must be an unsolved problem of science, specifically one with (at least) two well-defined and disjoint theories (see below for links to unsolved problems in science). That is, each theory is telling a very different causal story about what’s happening that explains the phenomenon in question so that, if one theory is correct, the other must be incorrect. You will just pick the best (in your opinion) two theories, even if there are many. Avoid “theories” that just point to statistical correlations but that do not propose a clear causal account. For instance, suppose some disease D for which science has not yet figured out the pathogenesis. Theory A states that M causes N which causes O which causes D. Theory B states that R causes P which causes O which causes D. You will then weigh the evidence and make a decision which theory is best supported (so far). 

(b) Secondly, there must be empirical (experimental) support for each of the two theories. You will not be able to write the prediction or data steps without there being extant empirical research results.

There are many unsolved problems of science that meet these two requirements among the following links: (Links to an external site.)


First, you must select a topic that meets the stated criteria (unsolved problem in science, two disjoint causal theories (i.e., if one theory is right, the other is wrong), an existing body of empirical research supporting each theory). If you have any doubts about your topic selection, you may ask me for confirmation. If you write on a topic not meeting the criteria, you risk getting a zero score.

Next, even if there exist many theories attempting to explain the unsolved problem, you should just identify the two strongest (in your opinion) competing theories. Investigate each theory and its supporting research carefully.

You will write your paper with the same subheadings as used in your homework assignments involving 2 models (as we did in analyzing crucial experiments): Real World, Model 1, Model 2, Prediction 1, Prediction 2, Data, Positive Evidence, Negative Evidence.

Unlike your homework answers, each section will be more expansive and involve more details.

There is a 1000 word minimum, not including the works cited page (which you must include).

Make sure you are putting the right content in the appropriate places (e.g., don’t tell me about data in the “Model” section, etc.). Also, you want to find differing predictions for each model, not matching ones. In the evaluative sections, I will be looking to see how you have carefully weighed the evidence and come to a judicious verdict, declaring one theory the stronger one over the other.

In the evaluative sections (Positive/Negative Evidence sections), you will declare your verdict regarding which theory is the “winner” and which is not, based on your consideration of the quality/quantity of supportive (and/or disconfirming) research and satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) of theoretical virtues.

Lastly, your paper will be processed by, so not only should you include a works cited page, you should also make sure any words/ideas not your own are properly quoted and/or cited.