UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Deductive reasoning starts from general premises, theories or principles and derives specific hypotheses or predictions that must follow if the premises are true. In research, this logic underlies many quantitative studies where hypotheses are formulated from existing theory and then tested against empirical data. If the data contradict the predictions, the theory may need revision. Thus, the movement from general to specific predictions described in the stem is characteristic of deductive reasoning.

Option A:
Inductive reasoning moves in the opposite direction, from specific observations to broader generalisations or theoretical propositions. It is more exploratory and does not begin with established general principles, so inductive reasoning does not match the description given in the question.

Option B:
Deductive reasoning provides a clear logical structure in which, if the premises are sound and the reasoning valid, the conclusion must be true. This feature makes it suitable for designing hypothesis-driven studies where empirical tests can potentially falsify theoretical claims. These aspects align closely with the stem.

Option C:
Abductive reasoning involves generating the most plausible explanation for a surprising observation, often using inference to the best explanation rather than strict logical deduction. It does not necessarily move from general laws to specific testable predictions in a formal way, so abductive reasoning is not the best answer.

Option D:
Analogical reasoning draws conclusions based on perceived similarities between two situations or domains, which may support speculation but not guarantee logical necessity. It is not the systematic general-to-specific logic described in the question, so analogical reasoning is not appropriate here.

Research objectives describe what the investigator plans to achieve, while hypotheses propose specific, testable explanations or predictions arising from those objectives and the literature. Hypotheses are often phrased in terms of relationships or differences between variables that can be examined empirically. They help determine what data are needed and what analyses should be conducted. Therefore, the tentative answers to the problem mentioned in the stem are correctly termed hypotheses.

Option A:
Variables are measurable characteristics or attributes of units in a study but do not themselves constitute tentative answers to the research problem. They are the elements about which hypotheses are framed rather than being the hypotheses.

Option B:
Assumptions are underlying conditions accepted as true for the purposes of the study without directly testing them. They are not explicit predictions about relationships or differences, so they do not fit the stem.

Option C:
Option C, hypotheses, encapsulates the idea that researchers make provisional claims that can be supported or refuted by data, bridging theory and observation. This matches the description of tentative, testable answers to the problem, making it correct.

Option D:
Indicators are specific empirical measures used to represent a variable, such as test scores or frequency counts. They operationalise concepts but are not themselves predictions, so they are not appropriate here.

Statements A, B, C and D provide a balanced description of inductive and deductive reasoning. A is correct because deductive reasoning applies general principles to reach specific conclusions, while B is accurate in describing induction as moving from specific observations to broader generalisations. Statement C recognises that both forms of reasoning can complement each other in research, and D is true because deductive logic is used to derive hypotheses from established theories. Statements E and F are false: pattern recognition is central to induction, and deductive arguments yield true conclusions only when their premises are true.

Option A:
Option A includes only A and B, which are both correct but do not cover the full role of reasoning in research. By leaving out C and D, it ignores the complementary use of both reasoning types and the role of deduction in generating testable hypotheses. Because it omits true statements, this option is incomplete.

Option B:
Option B is correct because it groups A, B, C and D, the four statements that together explain how inductive and deductive reasoning operate in research. It acknowledges their directions, their complementarity and their role in deriving hypotheses. Importantly, it excludes E and F, which misrepresent pattern recognition and the conditions for deductive validity.

Option C:
Option C goes wrong by adding statement E to an otherwise correct set. E inaccurately claims that induction never involves pattern recognition, whereas induction typically relies on noticing patterns in observations. Including a false statement makes this combination invalid.

Option D:
Option D includes F, which states that deductive reasoning guarantees true conclusions even if the premises are false. This is logically incorrect because the truth of a deductive conclusion depends on both valid form and true premises. By admitting F, this option cannot be accepted as correct.