Faculty of Health and Science
Department of
Clinical Psychology
Deductive Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning
•
Prof.Dr.Jabar.
A.A .Sura
Supervisor
• Darbaz
Rahman
Muhammad
Preparer
CONTENTS
Introduction ...............................................................................................3
History .....................................................................................................4
DEFINITION................................................................................................5
Deductive Reasoning .............................................................................5
Inductive reasoning ...............................................................................6
Types Inductive Reasoning ......................................................................8
1.generalization ......................................................................................8
2.anological reasoning...........................................................................8
3.sign reasoning .....................................................................................8
4.causal reasoning .................................................................................8
Types of Deductive Reasoning ..............................................................12
Syllogism ..............................................................................................12
Modus Ponens ......................................................................................12
Modus Tollens ......................................................................................13
conditional reasoning ..........................................................................13
How to use inductive reasoning ............................................................14
Monitor the situation or trend ........................................................14
Make an observation ......................................................................14
Create a theory................................................................................14
Implement your findings ................................................................14
How to use deductive reasoning ...........................................................16
Start with a theory ..........................................................................16
Develop a hypothesis .....................................................................16
Collect data and analyze the results .............................................16
Koya University
1
Clinical Psychology
Implement your findings ................................................................16
Apply Inductive Reasoning and deductive reasoning in: ....................17
Problem-solving..............................................................................17
Decision-making .............................................................................17
The Hiring Process .........................................................................18
Characteristics of inductive and deductive reasoning.........................19
Examples .................................................................................................19
Example of Inductive Reasoning ...................................................19
Example of Deductive Reasoning .................................................19
Strengths And Weakness Inductive Reasoning ...................................20
Strengths and weakness of Deductive Reasoning ...............................21
Similarities of inductive and deductive reasoning. ..............................21
Combining Deductive and inductive reasoning ....................................22
differences ...............................................................................................23
Common question about deductive and inductive reasoning .............26
REFRENCE ..............................................................................................27
Koya University
2
Clinical Psychology
INTRODUCTION
process of studying, induction and the deduction can be considered
separately. However, in reality, all the most critical and extensive scientific
research requires both types of reasoning. Induction and deduction are two
essential elements of a cognitive process, The interaction of these types of
reasoning is significant in terms of particular sciences, such as physics,
biology, and psychology, since the fundamental methods in research are
observation and experiment. Nevertheless, these approaches can be applied
in all academic subject areas.
The importance of inductive and deductive reasoning for college students
should be analyzed as it directly supports the process of obtaining new
knowledge and critical thinking in general.
Judgment and decision making involved evaluating opportunities and
selected one choice over another. A related kind of thinking is reasoning.
Reasoning is the process of drawing conclusion from principles and from
evidence.
In reasoning, we move from what is already know to infer a new conclusion
or to evaluated a proposed conclusion.
Reasoning is often divided into two types: inductive and deductive reasoning.
Koya University
3
Clinical Psychology
HISTORY
DEDUCTIVE REASONING
Francis Bacon is credited with introducing inductive
reasoning into scientific inquiry in the 17th century. while he was
the first to formalize the concept of true scientific method. He did
not do with a little help. the work of Nicolaus Copernicus and
Galileo Galilei influence Bacon tremendously. Inductive
reasoning begins with the specific details and observations uses
them to arrive at a principle to explain them.
Deductive Reasoning
The Greek philosopher Aristotle is considered to be the father of deductive
reasoning because he actually carved out the entire subject of logic for the
first time. He identified the most common and crucial type of reasoning. He
defined for the first time what it means to prove something, to prove it or
explain it, objectively, on the basis of fact.
Koya University
4
Clinical Psychology
DEFINITION
DEDUCTIVE REASONING
1.Deductive Reasoning
the deduction is a logically correct conclusion
based on knowledge or confirmed hypotheses. The deduction aims to test
hypotheses being general statements and then predict the consequences –
specifics. It is related to the structure of an argument, helping to combine the
data available accurately. For instance, in case a person recognizes a
reasoning failure, this indicates that the author of the statement structured it
incorrectly and made a wrong conclusion, the so-called formal fallacy
(Warren, 368). Deductive reasoning appears from logical certainty; the
correct use of the logic guarantees the preservation of the inference
accuracy; therefore, this reasoning is sometimes called truth-preserving.
Concerning benefits for college students, deductive reasoning is required
while working on an essay or research project. The most decisive point is
carefully structuring the arguments and avoiding an incorrect and
unreasonable conclusion. For instance, using deduction, the statement is
created without unnecessary information (Warren 368). Likewise, evaluating
someone else’s assumption while reading course materials, articles, and
lectures helps determine whether the argument’s structure is logical or it
contains some inaccuracies (Warren 368). Moreover, while conducting
scientific research, an experiment is based on deductive reasoning,
preceded by the formulation of a scientific hypothesis. It follows the
theoretical provisions of the concept adopted by the researcher in the study.
Furthermore, Deductive reasoning contributes to the intellectual
development of college students. The study provided by Warren argues that
evaluation activities that require deduction enhance students’ problemsolving skills (369). Inferences drawn from deductive reasoning can be
considered valid if their premises are true; in the other case, the conclusion
may be logical but incorrect.
Koya University
5
Clinical Psychology
Other advantages of the deductive method for students relate to learning
foreign languages. Grammar rules can be explained with the implementation
of such an approach; consequently, it provides more time to apply them in
practice (Farahani 87)
. Besides, the deductive method recognizes the intelligence and maturity of
students and the purpose of cognitive processes in learning (Farahani 86). It
meets the students’ expectations of the learning process, especially being
helpful for analytic learners (Farahani 87). With regard to teachers, deductive
reasoning allows them to interpret different aspects of the language during
the lesson. It contributes to anticipating what questions may arise before the
class.
2.Deductive reasoning (also called “deduction” is widely used in all
areas of scientific knowledge, considering the development of empirical
data and the transition from empirical to theory. If the conclusion is
obtained as a result of inductive reasoning, then deduction complements
the induction, expanding the amount of knowledge gained. In general, at
the initial stage of scientific research, induction prevails; in the development
and substantiation of scientific knowledge, deductive reasoning becomes
more critical and applicatory. Thus, these two approaches to scientific
knowledge are indistinguishably linked and complement each other.
INDUCTIVE REASONING
1.Inductive reasoning is a process of reasoning that concludes from specific
to general. It combines particular premises not strictly according to logic but
rather factual, psychological, or mathematical representations. The primary
purpose of inductive inferences in the process of cognition is a
generalization, namely obtaining comprehensive judgments (Wu and
Gyöngyvér 91). In terms of their content and cognitive significance, these
conclusions can vary from the generalizations of everyday practice to
empirical ones in research. The history of science reveals that many
discoveries in physics in the field of electricity, magnetism, and optics were
made on the basis of inductive generalization of empirical data (Warren 375).
Koya University
6
Clinical Psychology
Overall, multiple hypotheses in modern science rely on inductive reasoning
(Kirsty Williamson, 2009).
Concerning college students, inductive reasoning is vital as a deduction.
According to Wu and Gyöngyvér, similarities or differences enable students
to discover regularities and inductive reasoning can be applied in the process
of solving general problems. According to Buckley et al., students make
conclusions according to the information stored in the working memory.
Thus, inductive reasoning is advantageous as “by allowing for information to
be retrieved, stored, generated, represented, manipulated and inferred, it can
provide the necessary mental operations presented in an established
problem-solving framework” (Buckley et al.). Therefore, inductive reasoning
is a critical aspect of college students’ education process.
To sum up, both types of reasoning benefit college students’ learning
performance. Inductive reasoning is considered crucial in the scientific
study; students can use it to form hypotheses and theories. Referring to
deductive reasoning, allows them to apply theories to specific situations.
2. Inductive reasoning (also called “induction”) is probably the form of
reasoning we use on a more regular basis. Induction is sometimes referred
to as “reasoning from example or specific instance,” and indeed, that is a
good description. It could also be referred to as “bottom-up” thinking.
Inductive reasoning is sometimes called “the scientific method,”
although you don’t have to be a scientist to use it, and use of the word
“scientific” gives the impression it is always right and always precise, which
it is not. In fact, we are just as likely to use inductive logic incorrectly or
vaguely as we are to use it well.
Koya University
7
Clinical Psychology
Types Inductive Reasoning
1.GENERALIZATION
2.ANOLOGICAL REASONING
3.SIGN REASONING
4.CAUSAL REASONING
a type of reasoning in which examples or specific instances are used to
supply strong evidence for (though not absolute proof of) the truth of the
conclusion; the scientific method.
Inductive reasoning happens when we look around at various happenings,
objects, behavior, etc., and see patterns. From those patterns we develop
conclusions. There are four types of inductive reasoning, based on different
kinds of evidence and logical moves or jumps.
Generalization
Generalization is a form of inductive reasoning that draws conclusions
based on recurring patterns or repeated observations.
Vocabulary.com (2016) goes one step further to state it is “the process of
formulating general concepts by abstracting common properties of
instances.” To generalize, one must observe multiple instances and find
common qualities or behaviors and then make a broad or universal statement
about them. If every dog I see chases squirrels, then I would probably
generalize that all dogs chase squirrels.
Inductive reasoning through generalization is used in surveys and polls. If a
polling organization follows scientific sampling procedures (sample size,
ensuring different types of people are involved, etc.), it can conclude that their
poll indicates trends in public opinion. Inductive reasoning is also used in
science. We will see from the examples below that inductive reasoning does
not result in certainty. Inductive conclusions are always open to further
evidence, but they are the best conclusions we have now.
Koya University
8
Clinical Psychology
For example, if you are a coffee drinker, you might hear news reports at one
time that coffee is bad for your health, and then six months later that another
study shows coffee has positive effects on your health. Scientific studies are
often repeated or conducted in different ways to obtain more and better
evidence and make updated conclusions. Consequently, the way to disprove
inductive reasoning is to provide contradictory evidence or examples.
Causal Reasoning
Causal reasoning seeks to make cause-effect connections. Causal
reasoning is a form of inductive reasoning we use all the time without ever
thinking about it.
For example if the street is wet in the morning, you know that it rained based
on past experience. Of course, there could be another cause—the city
decided to wash the streets early that morning—but your first conclusion
would be rain. Because causes and effects can be so multiple and
complicated, two tests are used to judge whether the causal reasoning is
valid.
Good inductive causal reasoning meets the tests `of directness and strength.
The alleged cause must have a direct relationship on the effect and the
cause must be strong enough to make the effect.
If a student fails a test in a class that he studied for, he would need to
examine the causes of the failure. He could look back over the
experience and suggest the following reasons for the failure:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
He waited too long to study.
He had incomplete notes.
He didn’t read the textbook fully.
He wore a red hoodie when he took the test.
He ate food Heaven the night before.
He only slept four hours the night before.
The instructor did not do a good job teaching the material.
He sat in a different seat to take the test.
His favorite football team lost its game on the weekend before.
Koya University
9
Clinical Psychology
Which of these causes are direct enough and strong enough to affect his
performance on the test all of them might have had a slight effect on his
emotional, physical, or mental state.
Taking a test while sitting in a different seat from the one where you sit in
class has actually been researched (Sauffley, Otaka, & Bavaresco, 1985), as
has whether sitting in the front or back affects learning.
But (Benedict & Hoag, 2004). (In both cases, the evidence so far says that
they do not have an impact, but more research will probably be done.) From
the list above, probably have the most direct effect on the test failure. At this
point our student would need to face the concept of locus of control, or
responsibility—was the failure his doing.
Causal reasoning is susceptible to four fallacies: historical fallacy,
slippery slope, false cause, and confusing correlation and causation.
The first three will be discussed later, but the last is very common, and
if you take a psychology or sociology course, you will study correlation
and causation well.
Sign Reasoning
These are all signs of fall in this region. These signs do not make fall happen,
and they don’t make the other signs—cooler temperatures, for example—
happen. All the signs of fall are caused by one thing: the rotation of the earth
and its tilt on its axis, which make shorter days, less sunshine, cooler
temperatures, and less chlorophyll in the leaves, leading to red and brown
colors. It is easy to confuse signs and causes.
Sign reasoning
a form of inductive reasoning in which conclusions are drawn about
phenomena based on events that precede or co-exist with (but not
cause) a subsequent event (Kirsty Williamson, 2009). Signs are like the
correlation mentioned above under causal reasoning. If someone argues, “In
the summer more people eat ice cream, and in the summer there is
statistically more crime. Therefore, eating more ice cream causes more
crime!” (or “more crime makes people eat more ice cream.”), that, of course,
would be silly. These are two things that happen at the same time—signs—
Koya University
10
Clinical Psychology
but they are effects of something else – hot weather. If we see one sign, we
will see the other. Either way, they are signs or perhaps two different things
that just happen to be occurring at the same time, but not causes.
Analogical Reasoning
Analogical reasoning drawing conclusions about an object or
phenomenon based on its similarities to something else
As mentioned above, analogical reasoning involves comparison. For it to be
valid, the two things (schools, states, countries, businesses) must be truly
alike in many important ways–essentially alike. Although Harvard and Dalton
State are both colleges, they are not essentially alike in very many ways.
They have different missions, histories, governance, surrounding locations,
sizes, clientele, funding sources, funding amounts, etc.
State should have a law school.” On the other hand, there are colleges that
are very similar to DSC in all those ways, so comparisons could be valid in
those cases.
You have probably heard the phrase, “that is like comparing apples and
oranges.” When you think about it, though, apples and oranges are more
alike than they are different (they are both still fruit, after all). This observation
points out the difficulty of analogical reasoning.
Analogical reasoning is one of the less reliable forms of logic, although it is
used frequently.
To summarize, inductive or bottom-up reasoning comes in four
varieties, each capable of being used correctly or incorrectly.
Remember that inductive reasoning is disproven by counter evidence
and its conclusions are always up to revision by new evidence. Also,
the conclusions should be precisely stated.
Koya University
11
Clinical Psychology
TYPES OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING
There are three common types of deductive reasoning:
1. Syllogism
2. Modus Ponens
3. Modus Tollens
4.Conditional Reasoning
SYLLOGISM
One common type of deductive reasoning is known as a syllogism.
Syllogisms almost always appear in the three-line form, with a common term
that appears in both premises but not the conclusion.
Here is an example:
a) If a person is born in the 1970s, they’re in Generation X.
b) If a person is in Generation X, then they listened to music on a Walkman.
c) therefore if a person is born in the 1970s, then they listened to music on a
Walkman.
MODUS PONENS
Another type of deductive reasoning is known as modus ponens and it follows
this pattern:
a) If a person is born between 1981 and 1996, then they’re a millennial.
b) Miley was born in 1992.
c) Therefore Miley is a millennial.
This type of reasoning is also known as “affirming the antecedent,” because
only the first premise is a conditional statement, and the second premise
merely affirms that the first part of the previous statement (the antecedent)
applies.
Koya University
12
Clinical Psychology
MODUS TOLLENS
Yet another type of deductive reasoning is modus tollens, or “the law of
contrapositive.” It is the opposite of modus ponens because its second
premise negates the second part (the consequent) of the previous conditional
statement. For example:
a) If a person is born between 1981 and 1996, then they’re a millennial.
b) Bruce is not a millennial.
c) Therefore Bruce was not born between 1981 and 1996.
CONDITIONAL REASONING
One of the primary types of deductive reasoning is conditional reasoning in
which the reasoner must draw a conclusion based on an if then proposition,
the conditional if then proposition states that if antecedent condition
proposition is meet, then consequent event follow.
for example students study hard, then they score high on their exam under
some circumstance, if you have establish a conditional propositions from
which you may draw a well -reasoned conclusion. The usual set of conclusion
propositions from which you can draw a well-reasoned conclusion.
Koya University
13
Clinical Psychology
HOW TO USE INDUCTIVE REASONING
Here are four steps to help you use inductive reasoning
:
 Monitor the situation or trend
 MAKE AN OBSERVATION
 CREATE A THEORY
 IMPLEMENT YOUR FINDINGS
 Monitor the situation or trend
by Start monitoring the situation or trend that you want to analyze. For
example, maybe you want to use reasoning to create and implement a
new marketing strategy. You might examine past marketing strategies
you've done in the past or a competitor's marketing strategy. Take notes
on why these marketing plans were successful or unsuccessful. Also,
consider any factors that might've changed or skewed the results of your
marketing strategies. Try to be aware of these elements when you use
reasoning to make a conclusion.
Koya University
14
Clinical Psychology
 MAKE AN OBSERVATION
After you monitor the situation, you can make an observation. Observation is
when you examine something to gain information about it. For example, you
could observe your company's sales from the last time you implemented a
new marketing strategy to see why they increased, decreased, or
maintained. Then, take what you noticed while studying the situation to make
a specific observation.
 CREATE A THEORY
Next, you can make your theory, which is a general statement based on your
specific observations. To do this, analyze your observations to see if there
are any patterns or similarities. For instance, if your past three marketing
strategies went really well and increased your company's sales, then you
might theorize that a component of those plans is what contributed to its
overall success.
 IMPLEMENT YOUR FINDINGS
Now you can implement your findings to make changes or adjustments to
your company. Making appropriate changes to your company may help it
grow and become more successful. For example, if you find that your email
marketing is producing more sales, you might choose to continue creating
email marketing plans in the future.
Koya University
15
Clinical Psychology
HOW TO USE DEDUCTIVE REASONING
Here are four steps to help you use deductive reasoning:
 START WITH A THEORY
 DEVELOP A HYPOTHESIS
 COLLECT DATA AND ANALYZE THE RESULTS
 IMPLEMENT YOUR FINDINGS
 START WITH A THEORY
To use deductive reasoning, start with a theory. This could be any statement
that you create based on specific information or findings. Then, try to use
something work-related or something that you want to improve on, such as
communicating with clients. For example, you could say that email is the best
way to communicate with clients and explain why.
 Develop a hypothesis
Next, you can develop a hypothesis based on your theory. A hypothesis is a
proposal based on information or evidence. For example, you might use a
hypothesis in business to assess how a new business model might affect
your company. To develop a hypothesis, you can make an if-then statement.
For example, you might say, "If clients subscribe to our email subscription,
then they will develop brand loyalty, learn about our sales and products, and
buy from our store," as a specific statement that you can use to test your
theory.
 Collect data and analyze the results
Now you can to test your hypothesis. For this scenario, you could measure
how many email subscribers bought from your store within a week. To
see if your theory is accurate, you may also have to test other forms of
communication, such as mailing or text message subscriptions. Finally,
compare and analyze the results from each test to see which platform helped
you receive more sales.
Koya University
16
Clinical Psychology
 Implement your findings
After you've tested your results, you can implement your findings to help
improve your business. For example, if your results support your original
hypothesis, then you might want to send more emails to your subscribers.
You could even email them special deals or discounts to further increase your
sales.
APPLY INDUCTIVE REASONING AND DEDUCTIVE REASONING IN:
the workplace
You can often use both inductive and deductive reasoning in the workplace.
For example, you might use them to draw conclusions or make inferences
while working on projects, thinking of ideas, or trying to make a decision.
Here are three ways you can apply reasoning in the workplace:
 PROBLEM-SOLVING
You can use deductive reasoning to help problem-solve while at work. For
instance, if your approval rates start to decrease, you might use deductive
reasoning to determine why. You can look at your store reviews and see that
people think shipment times are taking too long. You and your team might
hypothesize that if you decrease shipment time on your products, then that
might satisfy your customers. To test this hypothesis, you could allocate
some employees to work in shipment and delivery.
 DECISION-MAKING
You can use inductive reasoning to help with decision-making. For example,
if you work in human resources, you might need to decide on a benefits
package. You might ask a population of the company about their preferences
for work schedules. If the majority of them prefer flexible work schedules,
then you can induce all of your employees would prefer flexible work
schedules. You can then include this result in your benefits plan to increase
employee satisfaction.
Koya University
17
Clinical Psychology

THE HIRING PROCESS
Both inductive and deductive reasoning are essential when collaborating
in the workplace. Whether or not you are aware of it, you are constantly
making inferences and drawing conclusions using both methods to create
ideas, and improve processes. Employers value candidates who can
logically think through problems and develop solutions. Here are a few
examples of situations when you might use inductive or deductive
reasoning in the hiring process:
a. Resume
You can include reasoning skills on your resume to show potential employers
that you can use critical thinking and problem-solving skills. To do this, you
can put reasoning skills and abilities in your skills section. Another way to
incorporate reasoning skills on your resume is to add ways that the skills
have helped in your previous roles. For example, you could explain how you
used reasoning to create a successful advertisement plan.
b. Cover Letter
In a cover letter, you can describe how you've used reasoning skills in more
detail. Try to include specific stories that have measurable, positive results.
For instance, you might write about when you developed a product that
increased overall sales because you reasoned that customers would be likely
to buy the product. If you don't have professional experience, try to think of
times when you used reasoning in school, a club, or volunteering.
c. Interview
Displaying your reasoning skills during an interview could increase your
chances of getting the job. You could incorporate stories that showcase your
reasoning skills while answering the interview questions. If the hiring
manager asks you to tell them about your previous role, you can explain it
and incorporate your reasoning skills. For example, you could tell them how
you used logical thinking to reallocate resources, increasing production
efficiency.
Koya University
18
Clinical Psychology
CHARACTERISTICS OF INDUCTIVE AND DEDUCTIVE REASONING
1. In Inductive reasoning, the process followed is to move from specific
observation to a broader and generalized conclusion.
2. In Deductive reasoning, the process begins with a general statement
to prove it with a logical conclusion.
3. Inductive reasoning is often called a “bottom-up approach” because
you start from an observation, detect patterns, formulate a hypothesis,
and reach a conclusion/theory.
4. Deductive reasoning is often called a “top-down approach” because
you start with a theory, narrow it down to a hypothesis, observe the
hypothesis, and ultimately reach a logical affirmation.
5. In Inductive reasoning, the truth of the premises does not mean that
the conclusion is true as well.
6. In Deductive reasoning, if the premises are true, the conclusion has to
be true.
EXAMPLES
 EXAMPLE OF INDUCTIVE REASONING
Observation: Pet dogs in my neighborhood are friendly.
Observe a pattern: All observed dogs are friendly.
Theory: All dogs are friendly.
 EXAMPLE OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING
Theory: All dogs are friendly.
Hypothesis: All pet dogs in my neighborhood are friendly.
Test hypothesis: Observe all dogs in the neighborhood.
Koya University
19
Clinical Psychology
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESS INDUCTIVE
REASONING
Let’s evaluate inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning by taking a look
at its strengths and weaknesses:
Strengths of Inductive Reasoning:
Range of probabilities
One of the most prominent advantages of inductive reasoning is that it allows
you to work with a range of probabilities, expanding your perception and
knowledge base despite the lack of literature available.
Encourages exploration
Inductive training begins with an observation and then moves on to
exploration to test the judgment made.
Weaknesses of Inductive Reasoning:
Limited scope
A drawback of inductive reasoning is that inferences are made from specific
situations that may not have significance in the real world.
Koya University
20
Clinical Psychology
STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESS OF DEDUCTIVE
REASONING
Strengths of Deductive Reasoning:
Helps substantiate decisions
Deductive reasoning can be used to effectively substantiate decisions such
as those related to work. Also, if the decision doesn’t produce the desired
results, you can still explain why you made the decision by providing logical
and objective explanations.
Reliable when the original premise is true
Another advantage of deductive reasoning is that your conclusion is almost
guaranteed to be true if all the original premises are true in all situations and
if the reasoning applied is correct.
Weaknesses of Deductive Reasoning:
Relies on initial premises being correct
Deductive reasoning heavily relies on the initial premises being correct.
The final argument is invalid if even one premise is found to be incorrect.
SIMILARITIES OF INDUCTIVE AND DEDUCTIVE REASONING.
Inductive and deductive reasoning both strive to construct a valid Inductive
argument. ... Therefore, inductive reasoning moves from specific instances
into a generalized conclusion, while deductive reasoning moves from
generalized principles that are known to be true to a true and specific
conclusion.
Koya University
21
Clinical Psychology
similarities include: Both are proposition logic i.e they join sentences to form
more complex sentences or propositions. Both have a premise and
conclusion; either general or specific conclusions.
COMBINING DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE REASONING
Deductive method and inductive method are two most fundamental and
widely used methodologies in research. The former starts from a pre-defined
model and use logic inference to derive hidden consequences. The
methodology is based on well-studied and well-understood logics. The
results can be justified. Its application does not rely on statistical significance
hence can be used on even small data. However, deductive approaches
usually suffer from very high worst case complexity, especially when the
underlying logics are very complex. Also it relies on high quality of data, which
can be time-consuming to generate. The later starts from a set of data
collected from real-world, and use statistical approaches to identify hidden
patterns. The methodology has solid mathematical foundations. It can be
applied to deal with a wide variety of quantifiable problems involving images,
audios, languages, etc. However, it is difficult to explain the result of inductive
method, and its application on long tail problems is limited.
In this project, student will investigate novel hybrid reasoning technologies
that combine the best of the both. Particularly, inductive method can be used
to generate the high-quality data required by deductive method or to speed
up the computation for deductive method, while deductive method can be
used to offer supervisions to the training of inductive method and also helps
to verify and explain its results.
Koya University
22
Clinical Psychology
DIFFERENCES
Reasoning in artificial intelligence has two important forms, Inductive
reasoning, and Deductive reasoning. Both reasoning forms have premises
and conclusions, but both reasoning are contradictory to each other.
Following is a list for comparison between inductive and deductive
reasoning:
 Deductive reasoning uses available facts, information, or knowledge
to deduce a valid conclusion.
 Deductive reasoning uses a top-down approach.
 Deductive reasoning moves from generalized statement to a valid
conclusion.
 Deductive reasoning, the conclusions are certain, whereas, in.
 Deductive reasoning arguments can be valid or invalid, which means
if premises are true, the conclusion must be true.
 Inductive reasoning involves making a generalization from specific
facts, and observations.
 Inductive reasoning uses a bottom-up approach.
 Inductive reasoning moves from specific observation to a
generalization.
 Inductive reasoning, the conclusions are probabilistic
 inductive reasoning argument can be strong or weak, which means
conclusion may be false even if premises are true.
Koya University
23
Clinical Psychology
 The differences between inductive and deductive can be
explained using the below diagram on the basis of arguments:
Koya University
24
Clinical Psychology
Basis for comparison
Deductive Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning
Definition
Deductive reasoning is the form of valid
reasoning, to deduce new information or
conclusion from known related facts and
information.
Inductive reasoning arrives at a
conclusion by the process of
generalization using specific
facts or data.
Approach
Deductive reasoning follows a top-down
approach.
Inductive reasoning follows a
bottom-up approach.
Starts from
Deductive
Premises.
from
Inductive reasoning starts from
the Conclusion.
Validity
In deductive reasoning conclusion must
be true if the premises are true.
In inductive reasoning, the truth
of premises does not guarantee
the truth of conclusions.
Usage
Use of deductive reasoning is difficult, as
we need facts which must be true.
Use of inductive reasoning is
fast and easy, as we need
evidence instead of true facts.
We often use it in our daily life.
Process
Theory→
hypothesis→
confirmation.
patterns→
Observations-→patterns→
hypothesis→ (Dr J Z Pan, 2018)
Theory.
Argument
In deductive reasoning, arguments may
be valid or invalid.
In
inductive
reasoning,
arguments may be weak or
strong.
Structure
Deductive reasoning reaches
general facts to specific facts.
Inductive reasoning reaches
from specific facts to general
facts.
Koya University
reasoning
starts
25
from
Clinical Psychology
COMMON QUESTION ABOUT DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE REASONING
1. Why do employers use Deductive Reasoning tests?
2. Apply Inductive Reasoning and deductive reasoning in:
A. Decision - Making
B. Problem – solving
C. The Hiring Process
D. All of them
3. Deductive method and inductive method are two most
fundamental and widely used
in research.
1. The
deductive reasoning test demonstrates a candidate’s ability to
analyses and interpret information to make a logical deduction. this type
of test that measures deductive reasoning ability is generally more
relevant for highly skilled roles, but is useful for almost every job
application. Recruiters and employers use deductive reasoning tests as
part of the application process – usually before an interview – because
this type of test is easy to apply to a range of candidates, no matter their
specific knowledge or skill set.
2. Answer / D
3. Answer/ methodologies
Koya University
26
Clinical Psychology
REFRENCE
o /inductive--deductive-reasoning. (n.d.). Retrieved from .professorcole.:
https://www.professorcole.com/inductive--deductive-reasoningunit.htm
o chalkypapers . (2022, september 21). Retrieved from Importance of
Deductive and Inductive Reasoning for College Student:
https://chalkypapers.com/importance-of-deductive-and-inductivereasoning-for-college-student/
o difference-between-inductive-and-deductive-reasoning.
(n.d.).
Retrieved from javatpoin: https://www.javatpoint.com/differencebetween-inductive-and-deductive-reasoning
o Dr J Z Pan, D. H. (2018, march 19). combining-deductive-and-inductivereasoning.Retrieved.from.findaphd:
https://www.findaphd.com/phds/project/combining-deductive-andinductive-reasoning/?p59957
o Inductive vs Deductive Reasoning - Definition and Examples. (2021,
augest 26). Retrieved from voxco: https://www.voxco.com/pricing/
o inductive-reasoning.(n.d.).Retrieved.from.pressbooks:)
https://cod.pressbooks.pub/communication/chapter/20-2-inductivereasoning/
o `Kirsty Williamson, S. M. (2009, Fec). Deductive Reasoning. Retrieved
from.sciencedirect:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/deductive-reasoning
Koya University
27
Clinical Psychology
o MasterClass. (2021, sep 30). What Is Deductive Reasoning? Learn the
Definition of Deductive Reasoning With Examples, Plus 3 Types of
Deductive.Reasoning.Retrieved.from.masterclass:
https://www.masterclass.com/articles/what-is-deductive-reasoning
o Team, I. E. (2021, may 17). Inductive Reasoning: Definition and
Examples. Retrieved from indeed.: https://ca.indeed.com/careeradvice/career-development/inductive-reasoning
o source of textbook: Cognitive Psychology, sixth. Robert J Sternberg
and Karin Sternberge.
Koya University
28
Clinical Psychology