Research is sometimes confused with science. Do we have a science of implementation? Are we engaged in research that will produce and grow our science?
Research can be done for many reasons –– to satisfy curiosity, explore possibilities, document some aspect of human behavior, test an idea, or survey what individuals think or believe. Research can also be done in support of science, where predictions and hypotheses are tested to challenge and advance theory.
Prediction (if this, then that) is the essence of science.
Research that tests predictions, replicates those tests, and produces findings that establish functional relationships and causal relationships between variables adds to science. When the predictions are based on theory, then the tests add to the understanding of the variables that impact and explain concepts included in a theory. Theory is testable (falsifiable) and is a source of many predictions until it is replaced by improved or different theories that produce better predictions.
Predictions and Hypotheses
In the history of science and philosophy of science, the ability to test predictions is the demarcation between science and non-science. Implementation science, like any science, is based on predictions and hypotheses that are tested in research. If we conduct research that tests implementation-theory-based predictions, then the tests of these predictions can be crowdsourced, and advances in our science can accelerate geometrically.
The results of research strengthen implementation theory and practice, sharpening and extending the next round of prediction and hypothesis testing.
Read our resources exploring topics related to the question: to what extent does current implementation research contribute to the development of a science of implementation?
Downloadable Resources
- Download: Science and Implementation
- Download: Implementation Science: Fidelity Predictions and Outcomes
- Download: Implementation Methods and Measures