However, there is no unique method for the construction of such an estimator and as a first hypothesis, is set to be deterministic.
As a first hypothesis we tested whether our data support the existence of a microendemic phenotype (MEP), i.e., whether frogs of small body size also have particularly small range sizes.
These are characterized by Whewell as, first, that "our hypotheses ought to fortel [sic] phenomena which have not yet been observed" (1858b, 86); second, that they should "explain and determine cases of a kind different from those which were contemplated in the formation" of those hypotheses (1858b, 88); and third that hypotheses must "become more coherent" over time (1858b, 91).
Corroborating our first hypothesis as well as the findings of most previous studies, we do not find that efficiency can be explained by a lack of quality.
As per our first hypothesis, we checked whether the presence of private (unsubsidised) provision for 3 6-year-olds makes a difference in perceived accessibility (Model 2).
As to the first hypothesis, one crucial prediction of this "NR2A triggering LTP/NR2B triggering LTD" hypothesis would be that overexpression of NR2B in rat hippocampus should lead to more robust LTD and no change in LTP.
As in the first hypothesis, we assume that the roo/ rooA element arose in the common ancestor of all 12 genomes.
As such, our first hypothesis is supported by the experiment: growing at higher RH increases stomatal conductance in trees while lowering photosynthetic WUE (Table 2), while the effect is largely mediated by changes in soil water status.
According to the definition of generic drugs, clinical outcomes were categorized as supporting the first hypothesis if no statistically significant difference was found between original and generic drug therapy or in case clinical outcomes yielded statistically significant better outcomes, e.g., lower adverse events or higher adherence rates, than original drugs.
Thus, the paper comes up with the first hypothesis as below: Hypothesis 1: Chinese shareholders react negatively to the disclosure of environmental violations.
