Back here I make the distinction between Kelly's hypothesis-setting and its challenging within social groups. Another distinction I make active thought and passive thought. I suppose that active thought is not given in normal social development and bonds. I suppose that reality is formed in a rather passive way. Hypothesis-setting is not done on taking for granted matters and what matters for most is done implicitly. Still I don't know what is meant with hypothesis-setting in the actual implicit meaning. I think the use of schemas is the most important thing to understand this. Scripts are not really schemas because schemas are rather a way to form your life. I should make examples of schemas myself. Mostly there is a position of your own role and function. While being free at the same time.
The constructivist approach on perception takes for granted that we use expectations and past memories while the ecological approach makes use of the environment in a rather passive way. This way is in fact bottom-up while still being passive. The Simon-Effect has also this characteristic and this tells more about our connection with external reality. I don't know if it is important to hypothesize about reality and how things are or are not. This scientific psychological stance is rather to stand above this. The best way is to get support in testing on a self-regulative and self-organizing manner. Why this is so important I don't know but I believe that the kind of group defines that there will be conformity (groupthink) or setting ideas to challenge within interaction inwards and outwards the group as such.