Deductive inductivity?

I guess that everyone was at least once thinking about how scientists formulate a theory or a statement based on the experiments they've carried out. Or maybe it's the other way round - they formulate a principle and then try to prove it right? Is their method inductive or deductive and what's actually the difference between those two?

Deductive reasoning is a basic form of valid reasoning. Deductive reasoning, or deduction, starts out with a general statement, or hypothesis, and examines the possibilities to reach a specific, logical conclusion. The scientific method uses deduction to test hypotheses and theories.

Inductive reasoning is the opposite of deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning makes broad generalizations from specific observations. Even if all of the premises are true in a statement, inductive reasoning allows for the conclusion to be false.  

Here is an example of deductive reasoning:

"All men are mortal. Harold is a man. Therefore, Harold is mortal." For deductive reasoning to be sound, the hypothesis must be correct. It is assumed that the premises, "All men are mortal" and "Harold is a man" are true. Therefore, the conclusion is logical and true.

Here is an example of inductive reasoning:

"Harold is a grandfather. Harold is bald. Therefore, all grandfathers are bald." The conclusion does not follow logically from the statements. Even if all of the premises are true in a statement, inductive reasoning allows for the conclusion to be false.

  

It's not hard to distinguish between deductive and inductive reasoning, especially if we have some funny examples! Deductive reasoning plays a role in testing hypotheses and theories and allows one to apply the theories to specific situations. Inductive reasoning has its place in the scientific method. Scientists use it to form hypotheses and theories.