Which statement correctly describes the relationship between inductive and deductive reasoning?

Which statement correctly describes the relationship between inductive and deductive reasoning?

• A. Inductive reasoning starts with a hypothesis and tests it.
• B. Deductive reasoning uses general rules to apply to specific cases.
• C. Inductive reasoning moves from concrete data to general principles, while deductive reasoning applies general rules to specific cases.
• D. Both types ignore evidence.

Answer: (C)

Reasoning in psychology often runs in two directions. Inductive reasoning builds general principles from specific observations: you notice patterns in concrete data and form a broader generalization. Deductive reasoning starts from a general rule or theory and applies it to a particular case to see what should be true. The statement that captures their relationship—that inductive moves from concrete data to general principles, while deductive applies general rules to specific cases—is the most complete description. For example, observing several adolescents who show increased autonomy in making choices from everyday situations is concrete data that might lead you to a general claim about adolescent development. Conversely, starting with a theory that all cognitive tasks rely on working memory allows you to predict how a specific task will be affected in someone with varying working-memory capacity. The other options either describe only one direction, mischaracterize how hypotheses fit into these processes, or claim that evidence is ignored, which isn’t accurate for either approach.

Reasoning in psychology often runs in two directions. Inductive reasoning builds general principles from specific observations: you notice patterns in concrete data and form a broader generalization. Deductive reasoning starts from a general rule or theory and applies it to a particular case to see what should be true. The statement that captures their relationship—that inductive moves from concrete data to general principles, while deductive applies general rules to specific cases—is the most complete description. For example, observing several adolescents who show increased autonomy in making choices from everyday situations is concrete data that might lead you to a general claim about adolescent development. Conversely, starting with a theory that all cognitive tasks rely on working memory allows you to predict how a specific task will be affected in someone with varying working-memory capacity. The other options either describe only one direction, mischaracterize how hypotheses fit into these processes, or claim that evidence is ignored, which isn’t accurate for either approach.