what is development of hypothesis

2.4 Developing a Hypothesis

Learning objectives.

• Distinguish between a theory and a hypothesis.
• Discover how theories are used to generate hypotheses and how the results of studies can be used to further inform theories.
• Understand the characteristics of a good hypothesis.

Theories and Hypotheses

Before describing how to develop a hypothesis it is imporant to distinguish betwee a theory and a hypothesis. A  theory  is a coherent explanation or interpretation of one or more phenomena. Although theories can take a variety of forms, one thing they have in common is that they go beyond the phenomena they explain by including variables, structures, processes, functions, or organizing principles that have not been observed directly. Consider, for example, Zajonc’s theory of social facilitation and social inhibition. He proposed that being watched by others while performing a task creates a general state of physiological arousal, which increases the likelihood of the dominant (most likely) response. So for highly practiced tasks, being watched increases the tendency to make correct responses, but for relatively unpracticed tasks, being watched increases the tendency to make incorrect responses. Notice that this theory—which has come to be called drive theory—provides an explanation of both social facilitation and social inhibition that goes beyond the phenomena themselves by including concepts such as “arousal” and “dominant response,” along with processes such as the effect of arousal on the dominant response.

Outside of science, referring to an idea as a theory often implies that it is untested—perhaps no more than a wild guess. In science, however, the term theory has no such implication. A theory is simply an explanation or interpretation of a set of phenomena. It can be untested, but it can also be extensively tested, well supported, and accepted as an accurate description of the world by the scientific community. The theory of evolution by natural selection, for example, is a theory because it is an explanation of the diversity of life on earth—not because it is untested or unsupported by scientific research. On the contrary, the evidence for this theory is overwhelmingly positive and nearly all scientists accept its basic assumptions as accurate. Similarly, the “germ theory” of disease is a theory because it is an explanation of the origin of various diseases, not because there is any doubt that many diseases are caused by microorganisms that infect the body.

A  hypothesis , on the other hand, is a specific prediction about a new phenomenon that should be observed if a particular theory is accurate. It is an explanation that relies on just a few key concepts. Hypotheses are often specific predictions about what will happen in a particular study. They are developed by considering existing evidence and using reasoning to infer what will happen in the specific context of interest. Hypotheses are often but not always derived from theories. So a hypothesis is often a prediction based on a theory but some hypotheses are a-theoretical and only after a set of observations have been made, is a theory developed. This is because theories are broad in nature and they explain larger bodies of data. So if our research question is really original then we may need to collect some data and make some observation before we can develop a broader theory.

Theories and hypotheses always have this  if-then  relationship. “ If   drive theory is correct,  then  cockroaches should run through a straight runway faster, and a branching runway more slowly, when other cockroaches are present.” Although hypotheses are usually expressed as statements, they can always be rephrased as questions. “Do cockroaches run through a straight runway faster when other cockroaches are present?” Thus deriving hypotheses from theories is an excellent way of generating interesting research questions.

But how do researchers derive hypotheses from theories? One way is to generate a research question using the techniques discussed in this chapter  and then ask whether any theory implies an answer to that question. For example, you might wonder whether expressive writing about positive experiences improves health as much as expressive writing about traumatic experiences. Although this  question  is an interesting one  on its own, you might then ask whether the habituation theory—the idea that expressive writing causes people to habituate to negative thoughts and feelings—implies an answer. In this case, it seems clear that if the habituation theory is correct, then expressive writing about positive experiences should not be effective because it would not cause people to habituate to negative thoughts and feelings. A second way to derive hypotheses from theories is to focus on some component of the theory that has not yet been directly observed. For example, a researcher could focus on the process of habituation—perhaps hypothesizing that people should show fewer signs of emotional distress with each new writing session.

Among the very best hypotheses are those that distinguish between competing theories. For example, Norbert Schwarz and his colleagues considered two theories of how people make judgments about themselves, such as how assertive they are (Schwarz et al., 1991) [1] . Both theories held that such judgments are based on relevant examples that people bring to mind. However, one theory was that people base their judgments on the  number  of examples they bring to mind and the other was that people base their judgments on how  easily  they bring those examples to mind. To test these theories, the researchers asked people to recall either six times when they were assertive (which is easy for most people) or 12 times (which is difficult for most people). Then they asked them to judge their own assertiveness. Note that the number-of-examples theory implies that people who recalled 12 examples should judge themselves to be more assertive because they recalled more examples, but the ease-of-examples theory implies that participants who recalled six examples should judge themselves as more assertive because recalling the examples was easier. Thus the two theories made opposite predictions so that only one of the predictions could be confirmed. The surprising result was that participants who recalled fewer examples judged themselves to be more assertive—providing particularly convincing evidence in favor of the ease-of-retrieval theory over the number-of-examples theory.

Theory Testing

The primary way that scientific researchers use theories is sometimes called the hypothetico-deductive method  (although this term is much more likely to be used by philosophers of science than by scientists themselves). A researcher begins with a set of phenomena and either constructs a theory to explain or interpret them or chooses an existing theory to work with. He or she then makes a prediction about some new phenomenon that should be observed if the theory is correct. Again, this prediction is called a hypothesis. The researcher then conducts an empirical study to test the hypothesis. Finally, he or she reevaluates the theory in light of the new results and revises it if necessary. This process is usually conceptualized as a cycle because the researcher can then derive a new hypothesis from the revised theory, conduct a new empirical study to test the hypothesis, and so on. As  Figure 2.2  shows, this approach meshes nicely with the model of scientific research in psychology presented earlier in the textbook—creating a more detailed model of “theoretically motivated” or “theory-driven” research.

Figure 2.2 Hypothetico-Deductive Method Combined With the General Model of Scientific Research in Psychology Together they form a model of theoretically motivated research.

As an example, let us consider Zajonc’s research on social facilitation and inhibition. He started with a somewhat contradictory pattern of results from the research literature. He then constructed his drive theory, according to which being watched by others while performing a task causes physiological arousal, which increases an organism’s tendency to make the dominant response. This theory predicts social facilitation for well-learned tasks and social inhibition for poorly learned tasks. He now had a theory that organized previous results in a meaningful way—but he still needed to test it. He hypothesized that if his theory was correct, he should observe that the presence of others improves performance in a simple laboratory task but inhibits performance in a difficult version of the very same laboratory task. To test this hypothesis, one of the studies he conducted used cockroaches as subjects (Zajonc, Heingartner, & Herman, 1969) [2] . The cockroaches ran either down a straight runway (an easy task for a cockroach) or through a cross-shaped maze (a difficult task for a cockroach) to escape into a dark chamber when a light was shined on them. They did this either while alone or in the presence of other cockroaches in clear plastic “audience boxes.” Zajonc found that cockroaches in the straight runway reached their goal more quickly in the presence of other cockroaches, but cockroaches in the cross-shaped maze reached their goal more slowly when they were in the presence of other cockroaches. Thus he confirmed his hypothesis and provided support for his drive theory. (Zajonc also showed that drive theory existed in humans (Zajonc & Sales, 1966) [3] in many other studies afterward).

Incorporating Theory into Your Research

When you write your research report or plan your presentation, be aware that there are two basic ways that researchers usually include theory. The first is to raise a research question, answer that question by conducting a new study, and then offer one or more theories (usually more) to explain or interpret the results. This format works well for applied research questions and for research questions that existing theories do not address. The second way is to describe one or more existing theories, derive a hypothesis from one of those theories, test the hypothesis in a new study, and finally reevaluate the theory. This format works well when there is an existing theory that addresses the research question—especially if the resulting hypothesis is surprising or conflicts with a hypothesis derived from a different theory.

To use theories in your research will not only give you guidance in coming up with experiment ideas and possible projects, but it lends legitimacy to your work. Psychologists have been interested in a variety of human behaviors and have developed many theories along the way. Using established theories will help you break new ground as a researcher, not limit you from developing your own ideas.

Characteristics of a Good Hypothesis

There are three general characteristics of a good hypothesis. First, a good hypothesis must be testable and falsifiable . We must be able to test the hypothesis using the methods of science and if you’ll recall Popper’s falsifiability criterion, it must be possible to gather evidence that will disconfirm the hypothesis if it is indeed false. Second, a good hypothesis must be  logical. As described above, hypotheses are more than just a random guess. Hypotheses should be informed by previous theories or observations and logical reasoning. Typically, we begin with a broad and general theory and use  deductive reasoning to generate a more specific hypothesis to test based on that theory. Occasionally, however, when there is no theory to inform our hypothesis, we use  inductive reasoning  which involves using specific observations or research findings to form a more general hypothesis. Finally, the hypothesis should be  positive.  That is, the hypothesis should make a positive statement about the existence of a relationship or effect, rather than a statement that a relationship or effect does not exist. As scientists, we don’t set out to show that relationships do not exist or that effects do not occur so our hypotheses should not be worded in a way to suggest that an effect or relationship does not exist. The nature of science is to assume that something does not exist and then seek to find evidence to prove this wrong, to show that really it does exist. That may seem backward to you but that is the nature of the scientific method. The underlying reason for this is beyond the scope of this chapter but it has to do with statistical theory.

Key Takeaways

• A theory is broad in nature and explains larger bodies of data. A hypothesis is more specific and makes a prediction about the outcome of a particular study.
• Working with theories is not “icing on the cake.” It is a basic ingredient of psychological research.
• Like other scientists, psychologists use the hypothetico-deductive method. They construct theories to explain or interpret phenomena (or work with existing theories), derive hypotheses from their theories, test the hypotheses, and then reevaluate the theories in light of the new results.
• Practice: Find a recent empirical research report in a professional journal. Read the introduction and highlight in different colors descriptions of theories and hypotheses.
• Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Strack, F., Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., & Simons, A. (1991). Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61 , 195–202. ↵
• Zajonc, R. B., Heingartner, A., & Herman, E. M. (1969). Social enhancement and impairment of performance in the cockroach.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13 , 83–92. ↵
• Zajonc, R.B. & Sales, S.M. (1966). Social facilitation of dominant and subordinate responses. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2 , 160-168. ↵

Share This Book

• Increase Font Size

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples

How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples

Published on May 6, 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on August 15, 2023.

A hypothesis is a statement that can be tested by scientific research. If you want to test a relationship between two or more variables, you need to write hypotheses before you start your experiment or data collection .

Example: Hypothesis

Daily apple consumption leads to fewer doctor’s visits.

Table of contents

What is a hypothesis, developing a hypothesis (with example), hypothesis examples, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about writing hypotheses.

A hypothesis states your predictions about what your research will find. It is a tentative answer to your research question that has not yet been tested. For some research projects, you might have to write several hypotheses that address different aspects of your research question.

A hypothesis is not just a guess – it should be based on existing theories and knowledge. It also has to be testable, which means you can support or refute it through scientific research methods (such as experiments, observations and statistical analysis of data).

Variables in hypotheses

Hypotheses propose a relationship between two or more types of variables .

• An independent variable is something the researcher changes or controls.
• A dependent variable is something the researcher observes and measures.

If there are any control variables , extraneous variables , or confounding variables , be sure to jot those down as you go to minimize the chances that research bias  will affect your results.

In this example, the independent variable is exposure to the sun – the assumed cause . The dependent variable is the level of happiness – the assumed effect .

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Step 1. ask a question.

Writing a hypothesis begins with a research question that you want to answer. The question should be focused, specific, and researchable within the constraints of your project.

Step 2. Do some preliminary research

Your initial answer to the question should be based on what is already known about the topic. Look for theories and previous studies to help you form educated assumptions about what your research will find.

At this stage, you might construct a conceptual framework to ensure that you’re embarking on a relevant topic . This can also help you identify which variables you will study and what you think the relationships are between them. Sometimes, you’ll have to operationalize more complex constructs.

Step 3. Formulate your hypothesis

Now you should have some idea of what you expect to find. Write your initial answer to the question in a clear, concise sentence.

4. Refine your hypothesis

You need to make sure your hypothesis is specific and testable. There are various ways of phrasing a hypothesis, but all the terms you use should have clear definitions, and the hypothesis should contain:

• The relevant variables
• The specific group being studied
• The predicted outcome of the experiment or analysis

5. Phrase your hypothesis in three ways

To identify the variables, you can write a simple prediction in  if…then form. The first part of the sentence states the independent variable and the second part states the dependent variable.

In academic research, hypotheses are more commonly phrased in terms of correlations or effects, where you directly state the predicted relationship between variables.

If you are comparing two groups, the hypothesis can state what difference you expect to find between them.

6. Write a null hypothesis

If your research involves statistical hypothesis testing , you will also have to write a null hypothesis . The null hypothesis is the default position that there is no association between the variables. The null hypothesis is written as H 0 , while the alternative hypothesis is H 1 or H a .

• H 0 : The number of lectures attended by first-year students has no effect on their final exam scores.
• H 1 : The number of lectures attended by first-year students has a positive effect on their final exam scores.

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

A hypothesis is not just a guess — it should be based on existing theories and knowledge. It also has to be testable, which means you can support or refute it through scientific research methods (such as experiments, observations and statistical analysis of data).

Null and alternative hypotheses are used in statistical hypothesis testing . The null hypothesis of a test always predicts no effect or no relationship between variables, while the alternative hypothesis states your research prediction of an effect or relationship.

Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world using statistics. It is used by scientists to test specific predictions, called hypotheses , by calculating how likely it is that a pattern or relationship between variables could have arisen by chance.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, August 15). How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved November 8, 2023, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/hypothesis/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, construct validity | definition, types, & examples, what is a conceptual framework | tips & examples, operationalization | a guide with examples, pros & cons, what is your plagiarism score.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Overview of the Scientific Method

10 Developing a Hypothesis

Learning objectives.

• Distinguish between a theory and a hypothesis.
• Discover how theories are used to generate hypotheses and how the results of studies can be used to further inform theories.
• Understand the characteristics of a good hypothesis.

Theories and Hypotheses

Before describing how to develop a hypothesis, it is important to distinguish between a theory and a hypothesis. A  theory  is a coherent explanation or interpretation of one or more phenomena. Although theories can take a variety of forms, one thing they have in common is that they go beyond the phenomena they explain by including variables, structures, processes, functions, or organizing principles that have not been observed directly. Consider, for example, Zajonc’s theory of social facilitation and social inhibition (1965) [1] . He proposed that being watched by others while performing a task creates a general state of physiological arousal, which increases the likelihood of the dominant (most likely) response. So for highly practiced tasks, being watched increases the tendency to make correct responses, but for relatively unpracticed tasks, being watched increases the tendency to make incorrect responses. Notice that this theory—which has come to be called drive theory—provides an explanation of both social facilitation and social inhibition that goes beyond the phenomena themselves by including concepts such as “arousal” and “dominant response,” along with processes such as the effect of arousal on the dominant response.

Outside of science, referring to an idea as a theory often implies that it is untested—perhaps no more than a wild guess. In science, however, the term theory has no such implication. A theory is simply an explanation or interpretation of a set of phenomena. It can be untested, but it can also be extensively tested, well supported, and accepted as an accurate description of the world by the scientific community. The theory of evolution by natural selection, for example, is a theory because it is an explanation of the diversity of life on earth—not because it is untested or unsupported by scientific research. On the contrary, the evidence for this theory is overwhelmingly positive and nearly all scientists accept its basic assumptions as accurate. Similarly, the “germ theory” of disease is a theory because it is an explanation of the origin of various diseases, not because there is any doubt that many diseases are caused by microorganisms that infect the body.

A  hypothesis , on the other hand, is a specific prediction about a new phenomenon that should be observed if a particular theory is accurate. It is an explanation that relies on just a few key concepts. Hypotheses are often specific predictions about what will happen in a particular study. They are developed by considering existing evidence and using reasoning to infer what will happen in the specific context of interest. Hypotheses are often but not always derived from theories. So a hypothesis is often a prediction based on a theory but some hypotheses are a-theoretical and only after a set of observations have been made, is a theory developed. This is because theories are broad in nature and they explain larger bodies of data. So if our research question is really original then we may need to collect some data and make some observations before we can develop a broader theory.

Theories and hypotheses always have this  if-then  relationship. “ If   drive theory is correct,  then  cockroaches should run through a straight runway faster, and a branching runway more slowly, when other cockroaches are present.” Although hypotheses are usually expressed as statements, they can always be rephrased as questions. “Do cockroaches run through a straight runway faster when other cockroaches are present?” Thus deriving hypotheses from theories is an excellent way of generating interesting research questions.

But how do researchers derive hypotheses from theories? One way is to generate a research question using the techniques discussed in this chapter  and then ask whether any theory implies an answer to that question. For example, you might wonder whether expressive writing about positive experiences improves health as much as expressive writing about traumatic experiences. Although this  question  is an interesting one  on its own, you might then ask whether the habituation theory—the idea that expressive writing causes people to habituate to negative thoughts and feelings—implies an answer. In this case, it seems clear that if the habituation theory is correct, then expressive writing about positive experiences should not be effective because it would not cause people to habituate to negative thoughts and feelings. A second way to derive hypotheses from theories is to focus on some component of the theory that has not yet been directly observed. For example, a researcher could focus on the process of habituation—perhaps hypothesizing that people should show fewer signs of emotional distress with each new writing session.

Among the very best hypotheses are those that distinguish between competing theories. For example, Norbert Schwarz and his colleagues considered two theories of how people make judgments about themselves, such as how assertive they are (Schwarz et al., 1991) [2] . Both theories held that such judgments are based on relevant examples that people bring to mind. However, one theory was that people base their judgments on the  number  of examples they bring to mind and the other was that people base their judgments on how  easily  they bring those examples to mind. To test these theories, the researchers asked people to recall either six times when they were assertive (which is easy for most people) or 12 times (which is difficult for most people). Then they asked them to judge their own assertiveness. Note that the number-of-examples theory implies that people who recalled 12 examples should judge themselves to be more assertive because they recalled more examples, but the ease-of-examples theory implies that participants who recalled six examples should judge themselves as more assertive because recalling the examples was easier. Thus the two theories made opposite predictions so that only one of the predictions could be confirmed. The surprising result was that participants who recalled fewer examples judged themselves to be more assertive—providing particularly convincing evidence in favor of the ease-of-retrieval theory over the number-of-examples theory.

Theory Testing

The primary way that scientific researchers use theories is sometimes called the hypothetico-deductive method  (although this term is much more likely to be used by philosophers of science than by scientists themselves). Researchers begin with a set of phenomena and either construct a theory to explain or interpret them or choose an existing theory to work with. They then make a prediction about some new phenomenon that should be observed if the theory is correct. Again, this prediction is called a hypothesis. The researchers then conduct an empirical study to test the hypothesis. Finally, they reevaluate the theory in light of the new results and revise it if necessary. This process is usually conceptualized as a cycle because the researchers can then derive a new hypothesis from the revised theory, conduct a new empirical study to test the hypothesis, and so on. As  Figure 2.3  shows, this approach meshes nicely with the model of scientific research in psychology presented earlier in the textbook—creating a more detailed model of “theoretically motivated” or “theory-driven” research.

As an example, let us consider Zajonc’s research on social facilitation and inhibition. He started with a somewhat contradictory pattern of results from the research literature. He then constructed his drive theory, according to which being watched by others while performing a task causes physiological arousal, which increases an organism’s tendency to make the dominant response. This theory predicts social facilitation for well-learned tasks and social inhibition for poorly learned tasks. He now had a theory that organized previous results in a meaningful way—but he still needed to test it. He hypothesized that if his theory was correct, he should observe that the presence of others improves performance in a simple laboratory task but inhibits performance in a difficult version of the very same laboratory task. To test this hypothesis, one of the studies he conducted used cockroaches as subjects (Zajonc, Heingartner, & Herman, 1969) [3] . The cockroaches ran either down a straight runway (an easy task for a cockroach) or through a cross-shaped maze (a difficult task for a cockroach) to escape into a dark chamber when a light was shined on them. They did this either while alone or in the presence of other cockroaches in clear plastic “audience boxes.” Zajonc found that cockroaches in the straight runway reached their goal more quickly in the presence of other cockroaches, but cockroaches in the cross-shaped maze reached their goal more slowly when they were in the presence of other cockroaches. Thus he confirmed his hypothesis and provided support for his drive theory. (Zajonc also showed that drive theory existed in humans [Zajonc & Sales, 1966] [4] in many other studies afterward).

Incorporating Theory into Your Research

When you write your research report or plan your presentation, be aware that there are two basic ways that researchers usually include theory. The first is to raise a research question, answer that question by conducting a new study, and then offer one or more theories (usually more) to explain or interpret the results. This format works well for applied research questions and for research questions that existing theories do not address. The second way is to describe one or more existing theories, derive a hypothesis from one of those theories, test the hypothesis in a new study, and finally reevaluate the theory. This format works well when there is an existing theory that addresses the research question—especially if the resulting hypothesis is surprising or conflicts with a hypothesis derived from a different theory.

To use theories in your research will not only give you guidance in coming up with experiment ideas and possible projects, but it lends legitimacy to your work. Psychologists have been interested in a variety of human behaviors and have developed many theories along the way. Using established theories will help you break new ground as a researcher, not limit you from developing your own ideas.

Characteristics of a Good Hypothesis

There are three general characteristics of a good hypothesis. First, a good hypothesis must be testable and falsifiable . We must be able to test the hypothesis using the methods of science and if you’ll recall Popper’s falsifiability criterion, it must be possible to gather evidence that will disconfirm the hypothesis if it is indeed false. Second, a good hypothesis must be logical. As described above, hypotheses are more than just a random guess. Hypotheses should be informed by previous theories or observations and logical reasoning. Typically, we begin with a broad and general theory and use  deductive reasoning to generate a more specific hypothesis to test based on that theory. Occasionally, however, when there is no theory to inform our hypothesis, we use  inductive reasoning  which involves using specific observations or research findings to form a more general hypothesis. Finally, the hypothesis should be positive. That is, the hypothesis should make a positive statement about the existence of a relationship or effect, rather than a statement that a relationship or effect does not exist. As scientists, we don’t set out to show that relationships do not exist or that effects do not occur so our hypotheses should not be worded in a way to suggest that an effect or relationship does not exist. The nature of science is to assume that something does not exist and then seek to find evidence to prove this wrong, to show that it really does exist. That may seem backward to you but that is the nature of the scientific method. The underlying reason for this is beyond the scope of this chapter but it has to do with statistical theory.

• Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation.  Science, 149 , 269–274 ↵
• Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Strack, F., Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., & Simons, A. (1991). Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61 , 195–202. ↵
• Zajonc, R. B., Heingartner, A., & Herman, E. M. (1969). Social enhancement and impairment of performance in the cockroach.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13 , 83–92. ↵
• Zajonc, R.B. & Sales, S.M. (1966). Social facilitation of dominant and subordinate responses. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2 , 160-168. ↵

A coherent explanation or interpretation of one or more phenomena.

A specific prediction about a new phenomenon that should be observed if a particular theory is accurate.

A cyclical process of theory development, starting with an observed phenomenon, then developing or using a theory to make a specific prediction of what should happen if that theory is correct, testing that prediction, refining the theory in light of the findings, and using that refined theory to develop new hypotheses, and so on.

The ability to test the hypothesis using the methods of science and the possibility to gather evidence that will disconfirm the hypothesis if it is indeed false.

Research Methods in Psychology Copyright © 2019 by Rajiv S. Jhangiani, I-Chant A. Chiang, Carrie Cuttler, & Dana C. Leighton is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Chapter 6 - Hypothesis Development

Chapter 6 overview.

This chapter discusses the third step of the SGAM, highlighted below in gold, Hypothesis Development.

A hypothesis is often defined as an educated guess because it is informed by what you already know about a topic. This step in the process is to identify all hypotheses that merit detailed examination, keeping in mind that there is a distinction between the hypothesis generation and hypothesis evaluation .

If the analysis does not begin with the correct hypothesis, it is unlikely to get the correct answer. Psychological research into how people go about generating hypotheses shows that people are actually rather poor at thinking of all the possibilities. Therefore, at the hypothesis generation stage, it is wise to bring together a group of analysts with different backgrounds and perspectives for a brainstorming session. Brainstorming in a group stimulates the imagination and usually brings out possibilities that individual members of the group had not thought of. Experience shows that initial discussion in the group elicits every possibility, no matter how remote, before judging likelihood or feasibility. Only when all the possibilities are on the table, is the focus on judging them and selecting the hypotheses to be examined in greater detail in subsequent analysis.

When screening out the seemingly improbable hypotheses, it is necessary to distinguish hypotheses that appear to be disproved (i.e., improbable) from those that are simply unproven. For an unproven hypothesis, there is no evidence that it is correct. For a disproved hypothesis, there is positive evidence that it is wrong. Early rejection of unproven, but not disproved, hypotheses biases the analysis, because one does not then look for the evidence that might support them. Unproven hypotheses should be kept alive until they can be disproved. One example of a hypothesis that often falls into this unproven but not disproved category is the hypothesis that an opponent is trying to deceive us. You may reject the possibility of denial and deception because you see no evidence of it, but rejection is not justified under these circumstances. If deception is planned well and properly implemented, one should not expect to find evidence of it readily at hand. The possibility should not be rejected until it is disproved, or, at least, until after a systematic search for evidence has been made, and none has been found.

There is no "correct" number of hypotheses to be considered. The number depends upon the nature of the analytical problem and how advanced you are in the analysis of it. As a general rule, the greater your level of uncertainty, or the greater the impact of your conclusion, the more alternatives you may wish to consider. More than seven hypotheses may be unmanageable; if there are this many alternatives, it may be advisable to group several of them together for your initial cut at the analysis.

Developing Multiple Hypotheses

Developing good hypotheses requires divergent thinking to ensure that all hypotheses are considered. It also requires convergent thinking to ensure that redundant and irrational hypotheses are eliminated. A hypothesis is stated as an "if … then" statement. There are two important qualities about a hypothesis expressed as an "if … then" statement. These are:

• Is the hypothesis testable; in other words, could evidence be found to test the validity of the statement?
• Is the hypothesis falsifiable; in other words, could evidence reveal that such an idea is not true?

Hypothesis development is ultimately experience-based. In this experienced-based reasoning, new knowledge is compared to previous knowledge. New knowledge is added to this internal knowledge base. Before long, an analyst has developed an internal set of spatial rules. These rules are then used to develop possible hypotheses.

Looking Forward

Developing hypotheses and evidence is the beginning of the sensemaking and Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) process. ACH is a general purpose intelligence analysis methodology developed by Richards Heuer while he was an analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). ACH draws on the scientific method, cognitive psychology, and decision analysis. ACH became widely available when the CIA published Heuer’s The Psychology of Intelligence Analysis . The ACH methodology can help the geospatial analyst overcome cognitive biases common to analysis in national security, law enforcement, and competitive intelligence. ACH forces analysts to disprove hypotheses rather than jump to conclusions and permit biases and mindsets to determine the outcome. ACH is a very logical step-by-step process that has been incorporated into our Structured Geospatial Analytical Method. A complete discussion of ACH is found in Chapter 8 of Heuer’s book.

General Approaches to Problem Solving Utilizing Hypotheses

Science follows at least three general methods of problem solving using hypotheses. These can be called the:

• method of the ruling theory
• method of the working hypothesis
• method of multiple working hypotheses

The first two are the most popular but they can lead to overlooking relevant perspectives, data, and encourage biases. It has been suggested that multiple hypotheses offers a more effective way of overcoming this problem.

Ruling Theories and Working Hypotheses

Our desire to reach an explanation commonly leads us to a tentative interpretation that is based on a single case. The explanation can blind us to other possibilities that we ignored at first glance. This premature explanation can become a ruling theory, and our research becomes focused on proving that ruling theory. The result is a bias to evidence that disproves the ruling theory or supports an alternate explanation. Only if the original hypothesis was by chance correct does our analysis lead to any meaningful intelligence work. The working hypothesis is supposed to be a hypothesis to be tested, not in order to prove the hypothesis, but as a stimulus for study and fact-finding. Nonetheless, the single working hypothesis can become a ruling theory, and the desire to prove the working hypothesis, despite evidence to the contrary, can become as strong as the desire to prove the ruling theory.

Multiple Hypotheses

The method of multiple working hypotheses involves the development, prior to our search for evidence, of several hypotheses that might explain what are attempting to explain. Many of these hypotheses should be contradictory, so that many will prove to be improbable. However, the development of multiple hypotheses prior to the intelligence analysis lets us avoid the trap of the ruling hypothesis and thus makes it more likely that our intelligence work will lead to meaningful results. We open-mindedly envision all the possible explanations of the events, including the possibility that none of the hypotheses are plausible and the possibility that more research and hypothesis development is needed. The method of multiple working hypotheses has several other beneficial effects on intelligence analysis. Human actions are often the result of several factors, not just one, and multiple hypotheses make it more likely that we will see the interaction of the several factors. The beginning with multiple hypotheses also promotes much greater thoroughness than analysis directed toward one hypothesis, leading to analytic lines that we might otherwise overlook, and thus to evidence and insights that might never have been considered. Thirdly, the method makes us much more likely to see the imperfections in our understanding and thus to avoid the pitfall of accepting weak or flawed evidence for one hypothesis when another provides a more possible explanation.

Drawbacks of Multiple Hypotheses

Multiple hypotheses have drawbacks. One is that it is difficult to express multiple hypotheses simultaneously, and therefore there is a natural tendency to favor one. Another problem is developing a large number of hypotheses that can be tested. A third possible problem is that of the indecision that arises as an analyst balances the evidence for various hypotheses, which is likely preferable to the premature rush to a false conclusion.

Actions That Help the Analyst Develop Hypotheses

Action 1: Brainstorming . Begin with a brainstorming session with your knowledge team to identify a set of alternative hypotheses. Focus on the hypotheses that are:

• logically consistent with the theories and data uncovered in your grounding;
• address the quality and relationships of spaces.

State the hypotheses stated in an "if ... then" format, for example:

• If the DC Shooter is a terrorist, then the geospatial pattern of events would be similar to other terrorist acts.
• If the DC Shooter is a serial killer, then the geospatial pattern of events would be similar to other serial killers.

Action 2: Review the hypotheses for testability , i.e., can evidence be could found to test the validity of the statement.

Action 3: Check the hypotheses for falsifiability , i.e., could evidence reveal that such an idea is not true.

Action 4: Combine redundant hypotheses.

Action 5:Consider the elimination of improbable and unproven hypotheses.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Korean Med Sci
• v.36(50); 2021 Dec 27

Formulating Hypotheses for Different Study Designs

Durga prasanna misra.

1 Department of Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India.

Armen Yuri Gasparyan

2 Departments of Rheumatology and Research and Development, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust (Teaching Trust of the University of Birmingham, UK), Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, UK.

Olena Zimba

3 Department of Internal Medicine #2, Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, Lviv, Ukraine.

Marlen Yessirkepov

4 Department of Biology and Biochemistry, South Kazakhstan Medical Academy, Shymkent, Kazakhstan.

Vikas Agarwal

George d. kitas.

5 Centre for Epidemiology versus Arthritis, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Generating a testable working hypothesis is the first step towards conducting original research. Such research may prove or disprove the proposed hypothesis. Case reports, case series, online surveys and other observational studies, clinical trials, and narrative reviews help to generate hypotheses. Observational and interventional studies help to test hypotheses. A good hypothesis is usually based on previous evidence-based reports. Hypotheses without evidence-based justification and a priori ideas are not received favourably by the scientific community. Original research to test a hypothesis should be carefully planned to ensure appropriate methodology and adequate statistical power. While hypotheses can challenge conventional thinking and may be controversial, they should not be destructive. A hypothesis should be tested by ethically sound experiments with meaningful ethical and clinical implications. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has brought into sharp focus numerous hypotheses, some of which were proven (e.g. effectiveness of corticosteroids in those with hypoxia) while others were disproven (e.g. ineffectiveness of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin).

Graphical Abstract

DEFINING WORKING AND STANDALONE SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

Science is the systematized description of natural truths and facts. Routine observations of existing life phenomena lead to the creative thinking and generation of ideas about mechanisms of such phenomena and related human interventions. Such ideas presented in a structured format can be viewed as hypotheses. After generating a hypothesis, it is necessary to test it to prove its validity. Thus, hypothesis can be defined as a proposed mechanism of a naturally occurring event or a proposed outcome of an intervention. 1 , 2

Hypothesis testing requires choosing the most appropriate methodology and adequately powering statistically the study to be able to “prove” or “disprove” it within predetermined and widely accepted levels of certainty. This entails sample size calculation that often takes into account previously published observations and pilot studies. 2 , 3 In the era of digitization, hypothesis generation and testing may benefit from the availability of numerous platforms for data dissemination, social networking, and expert validation. Related expert evaluations may reveal strengths and limitations of proposed ideas at early stages of post-publication promotion, preventing the implementation of unsupported controversial points. 4

Thus, hypothesis generation is an important initial step in the research workflow, reflecting accumulating evidence and experts' stance. In this article, we overview the genesis and importance of scientific hypotheses and their relevance in the era of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

DO WE NEED HYPOTHESES FOR ALL STUDY DESIGNS?

Broadly, research can be categorized as primary or secondary. In the context of medicine, primary research may include real-life observations of disease presentations and outcomes. Single case descriptions, which often lead to new ideas and hypotheses, serve as important starting points or justifications for case series and cohort studies. The importance of case descriptions is particularly evident in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic when unique, educational case reports have heralded a new era in clinical medicine. 5

Case series serve similar purpose to single case reports, but are based on a slightly larger quantum of information. Observational studies, including online surveys, describe the existing phenomena at a larger scale, often involving various control groups. Observational studies include variable-scale epidemiological investigations at different time points. Interventional studies detail the results of therapeutic interventions.

Secondary research is based on already published literature and does not directly involve human or animal subjects. Review articles are generated by secondary research. These could be systematic reviews which follow methods akin to primary research but with the unit of study being published papers rather than humans or animals. Systematic reviews have a rigid structure with a mandatory search strategy encompassing multiple databases, systematic screening of search results against pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, critical appraisal of study quality and an optional component of collating results across studies quantitatively to derive summary estimates (meta-analysis). 6 Narrative reviews, on the other hand, have a more flexible structure. Systematic literature searches to minimise bias in selection of articles are highly recommended but not mandatory. 7 Narrative reviews are influenced by the authors' viewpoint who may preferentially analyse selected sets of articles. 8

In relation to primary research, case studies and case series are generally not driven by a working hypothesis. Rather, they serve as a basis to generate a hypothesis. Observational or interventional studies should have a hypothesis for choosing research design and sample size. The results of observational and interventional studies further lead to the generation of new hypotheses, testing of which forms the basis of future studies. Review articles, on the other hand, may not be hypothesis-driven, but form fertile ground to generate future hypotheses for evaluation. Fig. 1 summarizes which type of studies are hypothesis-driven and which lead on to hypothesis generation.

STANDARDS OF WORKING AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

A review of the published literature did not enable the identification of clearly defined standards for working and scientific hypotheses. It is essential to distinguish influential versus not influential hypotheses, evidence-based hypotheses versus a priori statements and ideas, ethical versus unethical, or potentially harmful ideas. The following points are proposed for consideration while generating working and scientific hypotheses. 1 , 2 Table 1 summarizes these points.

Evidence-based data

A scientific hypothesis should have a sound basis on previously published literature as well as the scientist's observations. Randomly generated (a priori) hypotheses are unlikely to be proven. A thorough literature search should form the basis of a hypothesis based on published evidence. 7

Unless a scientific hypothesis can be tested, it can neither be proven nor be disproven. Therefore, a scientific hypothesis should be amenable to testing with the available technologies and the present understanding of science.

Supported by pilot studies

If a hypothesis is based purely on a novel observation by the scientist in question, it should be grounded on some preliminary studies to support it. For example, if a drug that targets a specific cell population is hypothesized to be useful in a particular disease setting, then there must be some preliminary evidence that the specific cell population plays a role in driving that disease process.

Testable by ethical studies

The hypothesis should be testable by experiments that are ethically acceptable. 9 For example, a hypothesis that parachutes reduce mortality from falls from an airplane cannot be tested using a randomized controlled trial. 10 This is because it is obvious that all those jumping from a flying plane without a parachute would likely die. Similarly, the hypothesis that smoking tobacco causes lung cancer cannot be tested by a clinical trial that makes people take up smoking (since there is considerable evidence for the health hazards associated with smoking). Instead, long-term observational studies comparing outcomes in those who smoke and those who do not, as was performed in the landmark epidemiological case control study by Doll and Hill, 11 are more ethical and practical.

Balance between scientific temper and controversy

Novel findings, including novel hypotheses, particularly those that challenge established norms, are bound to face resistance for their wider acceptance. Such resistance is inevitable until the time such findings are proven with appropriate scientific rigor. However, hypotheses that generate controversy are generally unwelcome. For example, at the time the pandemic of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and AIDS was taking foot, there were numerous deniers that refused to believe that HIV caused AIDS. 12 , 13 Similarly, at a time when climate change is causing catastrophic changes to weather patterns worldwide, denial that climate change is occurring and consequent attempts to block climate change are certainly unwelcome. 14 The denialism and misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic, including unfortunate examples of vaccine hesitancy, are more recent examples of controversial hypotheses not backed by science. 15 , 16 An example of a controversial hypothesis that was a revolutionary scientific breakthrough was the hypothesis put forth by Warren and Marshall that Helicobacter pylori causes peptic ulcers. Initially, the hypothesis that a microorganism could cause gastritis and gastric ulcers faced immense resistance. When the scientists that proposed the hypothesis themselves ingested H. pylori to induce gastritis in themselves, only then could they convince the wider world about their hypothesis. Such was the impact of the hypothesis was that Barry Marshall and Robin Warren were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2005 for this discovery. 17 , 18

DISTINGUISHING THE MOST INFLUENTIAL HYPOTHESES

Influential hypotheses are those that have stood the test of time. An archetype of an influential hypothesis is that proposed by Edward Jenner in the eighteenth century that cowpox infection protects against smallpox. While this observation had been reported for nearly a century before this time, it had not been suitably tested and publicised until Jenner conducted his experiments on a young boy by demonstrating protection against smallpox after inoculation with cowpox. 19 These experiments were the basis for widespread smallpox immunization strategies worldwide in the 20th century which resulted in the elimination of smallpox as a human disease today. 20

Other influential hypotheses are those which have been read and cited widely. An example of this is the hygiene hypothesis proposing an inverse relationship between infections in early life and allergies or autoimmunity in adulthood. An analysis reported that this hypothesis had been cited more than 3,000 times on Scopus. 1

LESSONS LEARNED FROM HYPOTHESES AMIDST THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

The COVID-19 pandemic devastated the world like no other in recent memory. During this period, various hypotheses emerged, understandably so considering the public health emergency situation with innumerable deaths and suffering for humanity. Within weeks of the first reports of COVID-19, aberrant immune system activation was identified as a key driver of organ dysfunction and mortality in this disease. 21 Consequently, numerous drugs that suppress the immune system or abrogate the activation of the immune system were hypothesized to have a role in COVID-19. 22 One of the earliest drugs hypothesized to have a benefit was hydroxychloroquine. Hydroxychloroquine was proposed to interfere with Toll-like receptor activation and consequently ameliorate the aberrant immune system activation leading to pathology in COVID-19. 22 The drug was also hypothesized to have a prophylactic role in preventing infection or disease severity in COVID-19. It was also touted as a wonder drug for the disease by many prominent international figures. However, later studies which were well-designed randomized controlled trials failed to demonstrate any benefit of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19. 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 Subsequently, azithromycin 27 , 28 and ivermectin 29 were hypothesized as potential therapies for COVID-19, but were not supported by evidence from randomized controlled trials. The role of vitamin D in preventing disease severity was also proposed, but has not been proven definitively until now. 30 , 31 On the other hand, randomized controlled trials identified the evidence supporting dexamethasone 32 and interleukin-6 pathway blockade with tocilizumab as effective therapies for COVID-19 in specific situations such as at the onset of hypoxia. 33 , 34 Clues towards the apparent effectiveness of various drugs against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in vitro but their ineffectiveness in vivo have recently been identified. Many of these drugs are weak, lipophilic bases and some others induce phospholipidosis which results in apparent in vitro effectiveness due to non-specific off-target effects that are not replicated inside living systems. 35 , 36

Another hypothesis proposed was the association of the routine policy of vaccination with Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) with lower deaths due to COVID-19. This hypothesis emerged in the middle of 2020 when COVID-19 was still taking foot in many parts of the world. 37 , 38 Subsequently, many countries which had lower deaths at that time point went on to have higher numbers of mortality, comparable to other areas of the world. Furthermore, the hypothesis that BCG vaccination reduced COVID-19 mortality was a classic example of ecological fallacy. Associations between population level events (ecological studies; in this case, BCG vaccination and COVID-19 mortality) cannot be directly extrapolated to the individual level. Furthermore, such associations cannot per se be attributed as causal in nature, and can only serve to generate hypotheses that need to be tested at the individual level. 39

IS TRADITIONAL PEER REVIEW EFFICIENT FOR EVALUATION OF WORKING AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES?

Traditionally, publication after peer review has been considered the gold standard before any new idea finds acceptability amongst the scientific community. Getting a work (including a working or scientific hypothesis) reviewed by experts in the field before experiments are conducted to prove or disprove it helps to refine the idea further as well as improve the experiments planned to test the hypothesis. 40 A route towards this has been the emergence of journals dedicated to publishing hypotheses such as the Central Asian Journal of Medical Hypotheses and Ethics. 41 Another means of publishing hypotheses is through registered research protocols detailing the background, hypothesis, and methodology of a particular study. If such protocols are published after peer review, then the journal commits to publishing the completed study irrespective of whether the study hypothesis is proven or disproven. 42 In the post-pandemic world, online research methods such as online surveys powered via social media channels such as Twitter and Instagram might serve as critical tools to generate as well as to preliminarily test the appropriateness of hypotheses for further evaluation. 43 , 44

Some radical hypotheses might be difficult to publish after traditional peer review. These hypotheses might only be acceptable by the scientific community after they are tested in research studies. Preprints might be a way to disseminate such controversial and ground-breaking hypotheses. 45 However, scientists might prefer to keep their hypotheses confidential for the fear of plagiarism of ideas, avoiding online posting and publishing until they have tested the hypotheses.

SUGGESTIONS ON GENERATING AND PUBLISHING HYPOTHESES

Publication of hypotheses is important, however, a balance is required between scientific temper and controversy. Journal editors and reviewers might keep in mind these specific points, summarized in Table 2 and detailed hereafter, while judging the merit of hypotheses for publication. Keeping in mind the ethical principle of primum non nocere, a hypothesis should be published only if it is testable in a manner that is ethically appropriate. 46 Such hypotheses should be grounded in reality and lend themselves to further testing to either prove or disprove them. It must be considered that subsequent experiments to prove or disprove a hypothesis have an equal chance of failing or succeeding, akin to tossing a coin. A pre-conceived belief that a hypothesis is unlikely to be proven correct should not form the basis of rejection of such a hypothesis for publication. In this context, hypotheses generated after a thorough literature search to identify knowledge gaps or based on concrete clinical observations on a considerable number of patients (as opposed to random observations on a few patients) are more likely to be acceptable for publication by peer-reviewed journals. Also, hypotheses should be considered for publication or rejection based on their implications for science at large rather than whether the subsequent experiments to test them end up with results in favour of or against the original hypothesis.

Hypotheses form an important part of the scientific literature. The COVID-19 pandemic has reiterated the importance and relevance of hypotheses for dealing with public health emergencies and highlighted the need for evidence-based and ethical hypotheses. A good hypothesis is testable in a relevant study design, backed by preliminary evidence, and has positive ethical and clinical implications. General medical journals might consider publishing hypotheses as a specific article type to enable more rapid advancement of science.

Disclosure: The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Author Contributions:

• Data curation: Gasparyan AY, Misra DP, Zimba O, Yessirkepov M, Agarwal V, Kitas GD.

How to Develop a Good Research Hypothesis

The story of a research study begins by asking a question. Researchers all around the globe are asking curious questions and formulating research hypothesis. However, whether the research study provides an effective conclusion depends on how well one develops a good research hypothesis. Research hypothesis examples could help researchers get an idea as to how to write a good research hypothesis.

This blog will help you understand what is a research hypothesis, its characteristics and, how to formulate a research hypothesis

Table of Contents

What is Hypothesis?

Hypothesis is an assumption or an idea proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested. It is a precise, testable statement of what the researchers predict will be outcome of the study.  Hypothesis usually involves proposing a relationship between two variables: the independent variable (what the researchers change) and the dependent variable (what the research measures).

What is a Research Hypothesis?

Research hypothesis is a statement that introduces a research question and proposes an expected result. It is an integral part of the scientific method that forms the basis of scientific experiments. Therefore, you need to be careful and thorough when building your research hypothesis. A minor flaw in the construction of your hypothesis could have an adverse effect on your experiment. In research, there is a convention that the hypothesis is written in two forms, the null hypothesis, and the alternative hypothesis (called the experimental hypothesis when the method of investigation is an experiment).

Essential Characteristics of a Good Research Hypothesis

As the hypothesis is specific, there is a testable prediction about what you expect to happen in a study. You may consider drawing hypothesis from previously published research based on the theory.

A good research hypothesis involves more effort than just a guess. In particular, your hypothesis may begin with a question that could be further explored through background research.

To help you formulate a promising research hypothesis, you should ask yourself the following questions:

• Is the language clear and focused?
• What is the relationship between your hypothesis and your research topic?
• Is your hypothesis testable? If yes, then how?
• What are the possible explanations that you might want to explore?
• Does your hypothesis include both an independent and dependent variable?
• Can you manipulate your variables without hampering the ethical standards?
• Does your research predict the relationship and outcome?
• Is your research simple and concise (avoids wordiness)?
• Is it clear with no ambiguity or assumptions about the readers’ knowledge
• Is your research observable and testable results?
• Is it relevant and specific to the research question or problem?

The questions listed above can be used as a checklist to make sure your hypothesis is based on a solid foundation. Furthermore, it can help you identify weaknesses in your hypothesis and revise it if necessary.

Source: Educational Hub

How to formulate an effective research hypothesis.

A testable hypothesis is not a simple statement. It is rather an intricate statement that needs to offer a clear introduction to a scientific experiment, its intentions, and the possible outcomes. However, there are some important things to consider when building a compelling hypothesis.

1. State the problem that you are trying to solve.

Make sure that the hypothesis clearly defines the topic and the focus of the experiment.

2. Try to write the hypothesis as an if-then statement.

Follow this template: If a specific action is taken, then a certain outcome is expected.

3. Define the variables

Independent variables are the ones that are manipulated, controlled, or changed. Independent variables are isolated from other factors of the study.

Dependent variables , as the name suggests are dependent on other factors of the study. They are influenced by the change in independent variable.

4. Scrutinize the hypothesis

The types of research hypothesis are stated below:

1. Simple Hypothesis

It predicts the relationship between a single dependent variable and a single independent variable.

2. Complex Hypothesis

It predicts the relationship between two or more independent and dependent variables.

3. Directional Hypothesis

It specifies the expected direction to be followed to determine the relationship between variables and is derived from theory. Furthermore, it implies the researcher’s intellectual commitment to a particular outcome.

4. Non-directional Hypothesis

It does not predict the exact direction or nature of the relationship between the two variables. The non-directional hypothesis is used when there is no theory involved or when findings contradict previous research.

5. Associative and Causal Hypothesis

The associative hypothesis defines interdependency between variables. A change in one variable results in the change of the other variable. On the other hand, the causal hypothesis proposes an effect on the dependent due to manipulation of the independent variable.

6. Null Hypothesis

Null hypothesis states a negative statement to support the researcher’s findings that there is no relationship between two variables. There will be no changes in the dependent variable due the manipulation of the independent variable. Furthermore, it states results are due to chance and are not significant in terms of supporting the idea being investigated.

7. Alternative Hypothesis

It states that there is a relationship between the two variables of the study and that the results are significant to the research topic. An experimental hypothesis predicts what changes will take place in the dependent variable when the independent variable is manipulated. Also, it states that the results are not due to chance and that they are significant in terms of supporting the theory being investigated.

Research Hypothesis Examples of Independent and Dependent Variables:

Research Hypothesis Example 1 The greater number of coal plants in a region (independent variable) increases water pollution (dependent variable). If you change the independent variable (building more coal factories), it will change the dependent variable (amount of water pollution).

Research Hypothesis Example 2 What is the effect of diet or regular soda (independent variable) on blood sugar levels (dependent variable)? If you change the independent variable (the type of soda you consume), it will change the dependent variable (blood sugar levels)

You should not ignore the importance of the above steps. The validity of your experiment and its results rely on a robust testable hypothesis. Developing a strong testable hypothesis has few advantages, it compels us to think intensely and specifically about the outcomes of a study. Consequently, it enables us to understand the implication of the question and the different variables involved in the study. Furthermore, it helps us to make precise predictions based on prior research. Hence, forming a hypothesis would be of great value to the research. Here are some good examples of testable hypotheses.

More importantly, you need to build a robust testable research hypothesis for your scientific experiments. A testable hypothesis is a hypothesis that can be proved or disproved as a result of experimentation.

Importance of a Testable Hypothesis

To devise and perform an experiment using scientific method, you need to make sure that your hypothesis is testable. To be considered testable, some essential criteria must be met:

• There must be a possibility to prove that the hypothesis is true.
• There must be a possibility to prove that the hypothesis is false.
• The results of the hypothesis must be reproducible.

Without these criteria, the hypothesis and the results will be vague. As a result, the experiment will not prove or disprove anything significant.

What are your experiences with building hypotheses for scientific experiments? What challenges did you face? How did you overcome these challenges? Please share your thoughts with us in the comments section.

Frequently Asked Questions

The steps to write a research hypothesis are: 1. Stating the problem: Ensure that the hypothesis defines the research problem 2. Writing a hypothesis as an 'if-then' statement: Include the action and the expected outcome of your study by following a ‘if-then’ structure. 3. Defining the variables: Define the variables as Dependent or Independent based on their dependency to other factors. 4. Scrutinizing the hypothesis: Identify the type of your hypothesis

Hypothesis testing is a statistical tool which is used to make inferences about a population data to draw conclusions for a particular hypothesis.

Hypothesis in statistics is a formal statement about the nature of a population within a structured framework of a statistical model. It is used to test an existing hypothesis by studying a population.

Research hypothesis is a statement that introduces a research question and proposes an expected result. It forms the basis of scientific experiments.

The different types of hypothesis in research are: • Null hypothesis: Null hypothesis is a negative statement to support the researcher’s findings that there is no relationship between two variables. • Alternate hypothesis: Alternate hypothesis predicts the relationship between the two variables of the study. • Directional hypothesis: Directional hypothesis specifies the expected direction to be followed to determine the relationship between variables. • Non-directional hypothesis: Non-directional hypothesis does not predict the exact direction or nature of the relationship between the two variables. • Simple hypothesis: Simple hypothesis predicts the relationship between a single dependent variable and a single independent variable. • Complex hypothesis: Complex hypothesis predicts the relationship between two or more independent and dependent variables. • Associative and casual hypothesis: Associative and casual hypothesis predicts the relationship between two or more independent and dependent variables. • Empirical hypothesis: Empirical hypothesis can be tested via experiments and observation. • Statistical hypothesis: A statistical hypothesis utilizes statistical models to draw conclusions about broader populations.

Wow! You really simplified your explanation that even dummies would find it easy to comprehend. Thank you so much.

Thanks a lot for your valuable guidance.

I enjoy reading the post. Hypotheses are actually an intrinsic part in a study. It bridges the research question and the methodology of the study.

Useful piece!

This is awesome.Wow.

It very interesting to read the topic, can you guide me any specific example of hypothesis process establish throw the Demand and supply of the specific product in market

Nicely explained

It is really a useful for me Kindly give some examples of hypothesis

It was a well explained content ,can you please give me an example with the null and alternative hypothesis illustrated

clear and concise. thanks.

So Good so Amazing

Good to learn

Thanks a lot for explaining to my level of understanding

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular

• Reporting Research

8 Effective Strategies to Write Argumentative Essays

In a bustling university town, there lived a student named Alex. Popular for creativity and…

• AI in Academia

Disclosing the Use of Generative AI: Best practices for authors in manuscript preparation

The rapid proliferation of generative and other AI-based tools in research writing has ignited an…

• Publishing Research

Setting Rationale in Research: Cracking the code for excelling at research

Knowledge and curiosity lays the foundation of scientific progress. The quest for knowledge has always…

How to Design Effective Research Questionnaires for Robust Findings

As a staple in data collection, questionnaires help uncover robust and reliable findings that can…

• Career Corner
• PhDs & Postdocs
• Trending Now

Intersectionality in Academia: Dealing with diverse perspectives

What Is Intersectionality in Academia? Intersectionality in academia refers to the recognition and study of…

Preserving Research Integrity: Why author guidelines on generative AI tools matter

Unraveling Research Population and Sample: Understanding their role in statistical…

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What support would you need for successful conference participation?

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

The Craft of Writing a Strong Hypothesis

Table of Contents

Writing a hypothesis is one of the essential elements of a scientific research paper. It needs to be to the point, clearly communicating what your research is trying to accomplish. A blurry, drawn-out, or complexly-structured hypothesis can confuse your readers. Or worse, the editor and peer reviewers.

A captivating hypothesis is not too intricate. This blog will take you through the process so that, by the end of it, you have a better idea of how to convey your research paper's intent in just one sentence.

What is a Hypothesis?

The first step in your scientific endeavor, a hypothesis, is a strong, concise statement that forms the basis of your research. It is not the same as a thesis statement , which is a brief summary of your research paper.

The sole purpose of a hypothesis is to predict your paper's findings, data, and conclusion. It comes from a place of curiosity and intuition . When you write a hypothesis, you're essentially making an educated guess based on scientific prejudices and evidence, which is further proven or disproven through the scientific method.

The reason for undertaking research is to observe a specific phenomenon. A hypothesis, therefore, lays out what the said phenomenon is. And it does so through two variables, an independent and dependent variable.

The independent variable is the cause behind the observation, while the dependent variable is the effect of the cause. A good example of this is “mixing red and blue forms purple.” In this hypothesis, mixing red and blue is the independent variable as you're combining the two colors at your own will. The formation of purple is the dependent variable as, in this case, it is conditional to the independent variable.

Different Types of Hypotheses‌

Types of hypotheses

Some would stand by the notion that there are only two types of hypotheses: a Null hypothesis and an Alternative hypothesis. While that may have some truth to it, it would be better to fully distinguish the most common forms as these terms come up so often, which might leave you out of context.

Apart from Null and Alternative, there are Complex, Simple, Directional, Non-Directional, Statistical, and Associative and casual hypotheses. They don't necessarily have to be exclusive, as one hypothesis can tick many boxes, but knowing the distinctions between them will make it easier for you to construct your own.

1. Null hypothesis

A null hypothesis proposes no relationship between two variables. Denoted by H 0 , it is a negative statement like “Attending physiotherapy sessions does not affect athletes' on-field performance.” Here, the author claims physiotherapy sessions have no effect on on-field performances. Even if there is, it's only a coincidence.

2. Alternative hypothesis

Considered to be the opposite of a null hypothesis, an alternative hypothesis is donated as H1 or Ha. It explicitly states that the dependent variable affects the independent variable. A good  alternative hypothesis example is “Attending physiotherapy sessions improves athletes' on-field performance.” or “Water evaporates at 100 °C. ” The alternative hypothesis further branches into directional and non-directional.

• Directional hypothesis: A hypothesis that states the result would be either positive or negative is called directional hypothesis. It accompanies H1 with either the ‘<' or ‘>' sign.
• Non-directional hypothesis: A non-directional hypothesis only claims an effect on the dependent variable. It does not clarify whether the result would be positive or negative. The sign for a non-directional hypothesis is ‘≠.'

3. Simple hypothesis

A simple hypothesis is a statement made to reflect the relation between exactly two variables. One independent and one dependent. Consider the example, “Smoking is a prominent cause of lung cancer." The dependent variable, lung cancer, is dependent on the independent variable, smoking.

4. Complex hypothesis

In contrast to a simple hypothesis, a complex hypothesis implies the relationship between multiple independent and dependent variables. For instance, “Individuals who eat more fruits tend to have higher immunity, lesser cholesterol, and high metabolism.” The independent variable is eating more fruits, while the dependent variables are higher immunity, lesser cholesterol, and high metabolism.

5. Associative and casual hypothesis

Associative and casual hypotheses don't exhibit how many variables there will be. They define the relationship between the variables. In an associative hypothesis, changing any one variable, dependent or independent, affects others. In a casual hypothesis, the independent variable directly affects the dependent.

6. Empirical hypothesis

Also referred to as the working hypothesis, an empirical hypothesis claims a theory's validation via experiments and observation. This way, the statement appears justifiable and different from a wild guess.

Say, the hypothesis is “Women who take iron tablets face a lesser risk of anemia than those who take vitamin B12.” This is an example of an empirical hypothesis where the researcher  the statement after assessing a group of women who take iron tablets and charting the findings.

7. Statistical hypothesis

The point of a statistical hypothesis is to test an already existing hypothesis by studying a population sample. Hypothesis like “44% of the Indian population belong in the age group of 22-27.” leverage evidence to prove or disprove a particular statement.

Characteristics of a Good Hypothesis

Writing a hypothesis is essential as it can make or break your research for you. That includes your chances of getting published in a journal. So when you're designing one, keep an eye out for these pointers:

• A research hypothesis has to be simple yet clear to look justifiable enough.
• It has to be testable — your research would be rendered pointless if too far-fetched into reality or limited by technology.
• It has to be precise about the results —what you are trying to do and achieve through it should come out in your hypothesis.
• A research hypothesis should be self-explanatory, leaving no doubt in the reader's mind.
• If you are developing a relational hypothesis, you need to include the variables and establish an appropriate relationship among them.
• A hypothesis must keep and reflect the scope for further investigations and experiments.

Separating a Hypothesis from a Prediction

Outside of academia, hypothesis and prediction are often used interchangeably. In research writing, this is not only confusing but also incorrect. And although a hypothesis and prediction are guesses at their core, there are many differences between them.

A hypothesis is an educated guess or even a testable prediction validated through research. It aims to analyze the gathered evidence and facts to define a relationship between variables and put forth a logical explanation behind the nature of events.

Predictions are assumptions or expected outcomes made without any backing evidence. They are more fictionally inclined regardless of where they originate from.

For this reason, a hypothesis holds much more weight than a prediction. It sticks to the scientific method rather than pure guesswork. "Planets revolve around the Sun." is an example of a hypothesis as it is previous knowledge and observed trends. Additionally, we can test it through the scientific method.

Whereas "COVID-19 will be eradicated by 2030." is a prediction. Even though it results from past trends, we can't prove or disprove it. So, the only way this gets validated is to wait and watch if COVID-19 cases end by 2030.

Finally, How to Write a Hypothesis

Quick tips on writing a hypothesis

1.  Be clear about your research question

A hypothesis should instantly address the research question or the problem statement. To do so, you need to ask a question. Understand the constraints of your undertaken research topic and then formulate a simple and topic-centric problem. Only after that can you develop a hypothesis and further test for evidence.

2. Carry out a recce

Once you have your research's foundation laid out, it would be best to conduct preliminary research. Go through previous theories, academic papers, data, and experiments before you start curating your research hypothesis. It will give you an idea of your hypothesis's viability or originality.

Making use of references from relevant research papers helps draft a good research hypothesis. SciSpace Discover offers a repository of over 270 million research papers to browse through and gain a deeper understanding of related studies on a particular topic. Additionally, you can use SciSpace Copilot , your AI research assistant, for reading any lengthy research paper and getting a more summarized context of it. A hypothesis can be formed after evaluating many such summarized research papers. Copilot also offers explanations for theories and equations, explains paper in simplified version, allows you to highlight any text in the paper or clip math equations and tables and provides a deeper, clear understanding of what is being said. This can improve the hypothesis by helping you identify potential research gaps.

3. Create a 3-dimensional hypothesis

Variables are an essential part of any reasonable hypothesis. So, identify your independent and dependent variable(s) and form a correlation between them. The ideal way to do this is to write the hypothetical assumption in the ‘if-then' form. If you use this form, make sure that you state the predefined relationship between the variables.

In another way, you can choose to present your hypothesis as a comparison between two variables. Here, you must specify the difference you expect to observe in the results.

4. Write the first draft

Now that everything is in place, it's time to write your hypothesis. For starters, create the first draft. In this version, write what you expect to find from your research.

Clearly separate your independent and dependent variables and the link between them. Don't fixate on syntax at this stage. The goal is to ensure your hypothesis addresses the issue.

5. Proof your hypothesis

After preparing the first draft of your hypothesis, you need to inspect it thoroughly. It should tick all the boxes, like being concise, straightforward, relevant, and accurate. Your final hypothesis has to be well-structured as well.

Research projects are an exciting and crucial part of being a scholar. And once you have your research question, you need a great hypothesis to begin conducting research. Thus, knowing how to write a hypothesis is very important.

Now that you have a firmer grasp on what a good hypothesis constitutes, the different kinds there are, and what process to follow, you will find it much easier to write your hypothesis, which ultimately helps your research.

Now it's easier than ever to streamline your research workflow with SciSpace Discover . Its integrated, comprehensive end-to-end platform for research allows scholars to easily discover, write and publish their research and fosters collaboration.

It includes everything you need, including a repository of over 270 million research papers across disciplines, SEO-optimized summaries and public profiles to show your expertise and experience.

If you found these tips on writing a research hypothesis useful, head over to our blog on Statistical Hypothesis Testing to learn about the top researchers, papers, and institutions in this domain.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. what is the definition of hypothesis.

According to the Oxford dictionary, a hypothesis is defined as “An idea or explanation of something that is based on a few known facts, but that has not yet been proved to be true or correct”.

2. What is an example of hypothesis?

The hypothesis is a statement that proposes a relationship between two or more variables. An example: "If we increase the number of new users who join our platform by 25%, then we will see an increase in revenue."

3. What is an example of null hypothesis?

A null hypothesis is a statement that there is no relationship between two variables. The null hypothesis is written as H0. The null hypothesis states that there is no effect. For example, if you're studying whether or not a particular type of exercise increases strength, your null hypothesis will be "there is no difference in strength between people who exercise and people who don't."

4. What are the types of research?

• Fundamental research

• Applied research

• Qualitative research

• Quantitative research

• Mixed research

• Exploratory research

• Longitudinal research

• Cross-sectional research

• Field research

• Laboratory research

• Fixed research

• Flexible research

• Action research

• Policy research

• Classification research

• Comparative research

• Causal research

• Inductive research

• Deductive research

5. How to write a hypothesis?

• Your hypothesis should be able to predict the relationship and outcome.

• Avoid wordiness by keeping it simple and brief.

• Your hypothesis should contain observable and testable outcomes.

• Your hypothesis should be relevant to the research question.

6. What are the 2 types of hypothesis?

• Null hypotheses are used to test the claim that "there is no difference between two groups of data".

• Alternative hypotheses test the claim that "there is a difference between two data groups".

7. Difference between research question and research hypothesis?

A research question is a broad, open-ended question you will try to answer through your research. A hypothesis is a statement based on prior research or theory that you expect to be true due to your study. Example - Research question: What are the factors that influence the adoption of the new technology? Research hypothesis: There is a positive relationship between age, education and income level with the adoption of the new technology.

8. What is plural for hypothesis?

The plural of hypothesis is hypotheses. Here's an example of how it would be used in a statement, "Numerous well-considered hypotheses are presented in this part, and they are supported by tables and figures that are well-illustrated."

9. What is the red queen hypothesis?

The red queen hypothesis in evolutionary biology states that species must constantly evolve to avoid extinction because if they don't, they will be outcompeted by other species that are evolving. Leigh Van Valen first proposed it in 1973; since then, it has been tested and substantiated many times.

10. Who is known as the father of null hypothesis?

The father of the null hypothesis is Sir Ronald Fisher. He published a paper in 1925 that introduced the concept of null hypothesis testing, and he was also the first to use the term itself.

11. When to reject null hypothesis?

You need to find a significant difference between your two populations to reject the null hypothesis. You can determine that by running statistical tests such as an independent sample t-test or a dependent sample t-test. You should reject the null hypothesis if the p-value is less than 0.05.

You might also like

Elevate Your Writing Game With AI Grammar Checker Tools

How to Write a Statement of the Problem in Research

Elicit vs. SciSpace: AI research assistant for effortless literature review

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. A lock ( ) or https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Keyboard Navigation

• Agriculture and Food Security
• Anti-Corruption
• Conflict Prevention and Stabilization
• Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance
• Economic Growth and Trade
• Environment, Energy, and Infrastructure
• Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment
• Global Health
• Humanitarian Assistance
• Innovation, Technology, and Research
• Water and Sanitation
• Burkina Faso
• Central Africa Regional
• Central African Republic
• Côte d’Ivoire
• Democratic Republic of the Congo
• East Africa Regional
• Power Africa
• Republic of the Congo
• Sahel Regional
• Sierra Leone
• South Africa
• South Sudan
• Southern Africa Regional
• West Africa Regional
• Afghanistan
• Central Asia Regional
• Indo-Pacific
• Kyrgyz Republic
• Pacific Islands
• Philippines
• Regional Development Mission for Asia
• Timor-Leste
• Turkmenistan
• Bosnia and Herzegovina
• North Macedonia
• Central America and Mexico Regional Program
• Dominican Republic
• Eastern and Southern Caribbean
• El Salvador
• Middle East Regional Platform
• West Bank and Gaza
• Dollars to Results
• Data Resources
• Strategy & Planning
• Budget & Spending
• Performance and Financial Reporting
• FY 2022 Agency Financial Report
• Records and Reports
• Budget Justification
• Our Commitment to Transparency
• Policy and Strategy
• How to Work with USAID
• Find a Funding Opportunity
• Organizations That Work With USAID
• Resources for Partners
• Get involved
• Business Forecast
• Safeguarding and Compliance
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Mission, Vision and Values
• News & Information
• Operational Policy (ADS)
• Organization
• Stay Connected
• USAID History
• Video Library
• Coordinators
• Nondiscrimination Notice
• Collective Bargaining Agreements
• Disabilities Employment Program
• Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey
• Reasonable Accommodations
• Urgent Hiring Needs
• Vacancy Announcements
• Search Search Search

Development Hypotheses

A development hypothesis states what will occur if a particular intervention is undertaken, or a combination of several building blocks that are critical for bringing about a particular development outcome are put in place. USAID's CDCS guidance makes it clear that these propositions cannot simply be wishes. USAID expects development hypotheses to be grounded in evidence.

In the Development Hypothesis section of a CDCS, USAID requires a short narrative that articulates the hypothesized linkages between a CDCS Goal, each DO that supports it, and, in turn, the linkages between each DO and its supporting IRs and sub-IRs. USAID staff who have experience developing a Results Framework will recognize, on the right, the graphic devices that tool uses for expressing development hypotheses.

In a Development Hypothesis narrative, hypotheses are often written out as causal "if-then" propositions. Several such propositions laid out in a sequence describe a strategy’s "theory of change."

For example, USAID development hypothesis for realizing increased trade might be written out this way:

If maritime transport costs decline, the volume of trade in the target country will increase.

Working down to explain how maritime transport cost would be reduced, a Mission might write:

If port efficiency is increased, then maritime transport costs for exporters and importers will decline.

In turn, the Mission might hypothesize that:

If goods-handling systems at the ports are automated, then port efficiency will rise.

Laid out this way, each of the causal hypotheses that underlie a Mission’s strategy is both potentially testable and specified in a way that can be monitored and evaluated.

For this theory of change, would the Mission involved be able to cite references to demonstrate that its strategy was "evidence-based?" Absolutely. Over the past decade, a significant body of literature has emerged, based largely on multi-country regression analyses, demonstrating that results along this chain to be highly associated, making it likely, though not certain, that if USAID invests in a strategy based on this theory of change the results it expects will materialize.

USAID/Uganda's Tips for Producing Promising Development Hypotheses

•  If USAID introduces RUTF (nutrition treatment) through the GOU’s IMAM and community referral approach to severely malnourished Ugandans in 28 focus, North, and Southwest districts, then these districts will experience significant, respective reductions in current wasting rates.
• If USAID promotes certain labor-saving technologies, off-farm enterprises, or other methods for increasing decision-making and access to assets among smallholder women agriculturalists, then such households’ nutritional and livelihood conditions will measurably improve.
• Improved market opportunities for coffee will lead to increased incomes for farmers will it automatically? What can get in the way of that happening? Even if it is true, what does AID have to do with this?

• NUMERACY SKILLS
• Developing and Testing Hypotheses

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Numeracy Skills:

• A - Z List of Numeracy Skills
• How Good Are Your Numeracy Skills? Numeracy Quiz
• Money Management and Financial Skills
• Real-World Maths
• Numbers | An Introduction
• Special Numbers and Mathematical Concepts
• Systems of Measurement
• Common Mathematical Symbols and Terminology
• Apps to Help with Maths
• Subtraction -
• Multiplication ×
• Positive and Negative Numbers
• Ordering Mathematical Operations - BODMAS
• Mental Arithmetic – Basic Mental Maths Hacks
• Ratio and Proportion
• Percentages %
• Percentage Calculators
• Percentage Change | Increase and Decrease
• Calculating with Time
• Estimation, Approximation and Rounding
• Introduction to Geometry: Points, Lines and Planes
• Introduction to Cartesian Coordinate Systems
• Polar, Cylindrical and Spherical Coordinates
• Properties of Polygons
• Simple Transformations of 2-Dimensional Shapes
• Circles and Curved Shapes
• Perimeter and Circumference
• Calculating Area
• Three-Dimensional Shapes
• Net Diagrams of 3D Shapes
• Calculating Volume
• Area, Surface Area and Volume Reference Sheet
• Graphs and Charts
• Averages (Mean, Median & Mode)
• Simple Statistical Analysis
• Statistical Analysis: Types of Data
• Understanding Correlations
• Understanding Statistical Distributions
• Significance and Confidence Intervals
• Multivariate Analysis
• Introduction to Algebra
• Simultaneous and Quadratic Equations
• Introduction to Trigonometry
• Introduction to Probability

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.

You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.

We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Statistical Analysis: Developing and Testing Hypotheses

Statistical hypothesis testing is sometimes known as confirmatory data analysis. It is a way of drawing inferences from data. In the process, you develop a hypothesis or theory about what you might see in your research. You then test that hypothesis against the data that you collect.

Hypothesis testing is generally used when you want to compare two groups, or compare a group against an idealised position.

Before You Start: Developing A Research Hypothesis

Before you can do any kind of research in social science fields such as management, you need a research question or hypothesis. Research is generally designed to either answer a research question or consider a research hypothesis . These two are closely linked, and generally one or the other is used, rather than both.

A research question is the question that your research sets out to answer . For example:

Do men and women like ice cream equally?

Do men and women like the same flavours of ice cream?

What are the main problems in the market for ice cream?

How can the market for ice cream be segmented and targeted?

Research hypotheses are statements of what you believe you will find in your research.

These are then tested statistically during the research to see if your belief is correct. Examples include:

Men and women like ice cream to different extents.

Men and women like different flavours of ice cream.

Men are more likely than women to like mint ice cream.

Women are more likely than men to like chocolate ice cream.

Both men and women prefer strawberry to vanilla ice cream.

Relationships vs Differences

Research hypotheses can be expressed in terms of differences between groups, or relationships between variables. However, these are two sides of the same coin: almost any hypothesis could be set out in either way.

For example:

There is a relationship between gender and liking ice cream OR

Men are more likely to like ice cream than women.

Testing Research Hypotheses

The purpose of statistical hypothesis testing is to use a sample to draw inferences about a population.

Testing research hypotheses requires a number of steps:

Step 1. Define your research hypothesis

The first step in any hypothesis testing is to identify your hypothesis, which you will then go on to test. How you define your hypothesis may affect the type of statistical testing that you do, so it is important to be clear about it. In particular, consider whether you are going to hypothesise simply that there is a relationship or speculate about the direction of the relationship.

Using the examples above:

There is a relationship between gender and liking ice cream is a non-directional hypothesis. You have simply specified that there is a relationship, not whether men or women like ice cream more.

However, men are more likely to like ice cream than women is directional : you have specified which gender is more likely to like ice cream.

Generally, it is better not to specify direction unless you are moderately sure about it.

Step 2. Define the null hypothesis

The null hypothesis is basically a statement of what you are hoping to disprove: the opposite of your ‘guess’ about the relationship. For example, in the hypotheses above, the null hypothesis would be:

Men and women like ice cream equally, or

There is no relationship between gender and ice cream.

This also defines your ‘alternative hypothesis’ which is your ‘test hypothesis’ ( men like ice cream more than women ). Your null hypothesis is generally that there is no difference, because this is the simplest position.

The purpose of hypothesis testing is to disprove the null hypothesis. If you cannot disprove the null hypothesis, you have to assume it is correct.

Step 3. Develop a summary measure that describes your variable of interest for each group you wish to compare

Our page on Simple Statistical Analysis describes several summary measures, including two of the most common, mean and median.

The next step in your hypothesis testing is to develop a summary measure for each of your groups. For example, to test the gender differences in liking for ice cream, you might ask people how much they liked ice cream on a scale of 1 to 5. Alternatively, you might have data about the number of times that ice creams are consumed each week in the summer months.

You then need to produce a summary measure for each group, usually mean and standard deviation. These may be similar for each group, or quite different.

Step 4. Choose a reference distribution and calculate a test statistic

To decide whether there is a genuine difference between the two groups, you have to use a reference distribution against which to measure the values from the two groups.

The most common source of reference distributions is a standard distribution such as the normal distribution or t - distribution. These two are the same, except that the standard deviation of the t -distribution is estimated from the sample, and that of the normal distribution is known. There is more about this in our page on Statistical Distributions .

You then compare the summary data from the two groups by using them to calculate a test statistic. There is a standard formula for every test statistic and reference distribution. The test and reference distribution depend on your data and the purpose of your testing (see below).

The test that you use to compare your groups will depend on how many groups you have, the type of data that you have collected, and how reliable your data are. In general, you would use different tests for comparing two groups than you would for comparing three or more.

Our page Surveys and Survey Design explains that there are two types of answer scale, continuous and categorical. Age, for example, is a continuous scale, although it can also be grouped into categories. You may also find it helpful to read our page on Types of Data .

Gender is a category scale.

For a continuous scale, you can use the mean values of the two groups that you are comparing.

For a category scale, you need to use the median values.

Source: Easterby-Smith, Thorpe and Jackson, Management Research 4th Edition

One- or Two-Tailed Test

The other thing that you have to decide is whether you use what is known as a ‘one-tailed’ or ‘two-tailed’ test.

This allows you to compare differences between groups in either one or both directions.

In practice, this boils down to whether your research hypothesis is expressed as ‘x is likely to be more than y’, or ‘x is likely to be different from y’. If you are confident of the direction of the distance (that is, you are sure that the only options are that ‘x is likely to be more than y’ or ‘x and y are the same’), then your test will be one-tailed. If not, it will be two-tailed .

If there is any doubt, it is better to use a two-tailed test.

You should only use a one-tailed test when you are certain about the direction of the difference, and it doesn’t matter if you are wrong.

The graph under Step 5 shows a two-tailed test.

If you are not very confident about the quality of the data collected, for example because the inputting was done quickly and cheaply, or because the data have not been checked, then you may prefer to use the median  even if the data are continuous  to avoid any problems with outliers. This makes the tests more robust, and the results more reliable.

Our page on correlations suggests that you may also want to plot a scattergraph before undertaking any further analysis. This will also help you to identify any outliers or potential problems with the data.

Calculating the Test Statistic

For each type of test, there is a standard formula for the test statistic. For example, for the t -test, it is:

(M1-M2)/SE(diff)

M1 is the mean of the first group

M2 is the mean of the second group

SE(diff) is the standard error of the difference, which is calculated from the standard deviation and the sample size of each group.

The formula for calculating the standard error of the difference between means is:

• sd 2 = the square of the standard deviation of the source population (i.e., the variance);
• n a = the size of sample A; and
• n b = the size of sample B.

Step 5. Identify Acceptance and Rejection Regions

The final part of the test is to see if your test statistic is significant—in other words, whether you are going to accept or reject your null hypothesis. You need to consider first what level of significance is required. This tells you the probability that you have achieved your result by chance.

Significance (or p-value) is usually required to be either 5% or 1%, meaning that you are 95% or 99% confident that your result was not achieved by chance.

NOTE:  the significance level is sometimes expressed as  p  < 0.05 or  p  < 0.01.

For more about significance, you may like to read our page on Significance and Confidence Intervals .

The graph below shows a reference distribution (this one could be either the normal or the t- distribution) with the acceptance and rejection regions marked. It also shows the critical values. µ is the mean. For more about this, you may like to read our page on Statistical Distributions .

The critical values are identified from published statistical tables for your reference distribution, which are available for different levels of significance.

If your test statistic falls within either of the two rejection regions (that is, it is greater than the higher critical value, or less than the lower one), you will reject the null hypothesis. You can therefore accept your alternative hypothesis.

Step 6. Draw Conclusions and Inferences

The final step is to draw conclusions.

If your test statistic fell within the rejection region, and you have rejected the null hypothesis, you can therefore conclude that there is a gender difference in liking for ice cream, using the example above.

Types of Error

There are four possible outcomes from statistical testing (see table):

The groups are different, and you conclude that they are different (correct result)

The groups are different, but you conclude that they are not (Type II error)

The groups are the same, but you conclude that they are different (Type I error)

The groups are the same, and you conclude that they are the same (correct result).

Type I errors are generally considered more important than Type II, because they have the potential to change the status quo.

For example, if you wrongly conclude that a new medical treatment is effective, doctors are likely to move to providing that treatment. Patients may receive the treatment instead of an alternative that could have fewer side effects, and pharmaceutical companies may stop looking for an alternative treatment.

Further Reading from Skills You Need

Data Handling and Algebra Part of The Skills You Need Guide to Numeracy

This eBook covers the basics of data handling, data visualisation, basic statistical analysis and algebra. The book contains plenty of worked examples to improve understanding as well as real-world examples to show you how these concepts are useful.

Whether you want to brush up on your basics, or help your children with their learning, this is the book for you.

There are statistical software packages available that will carry out all these tests for you. However, if you have never studied statistics, and you’re not very confident about what you’re doing, you are probably best off discussing it with a statistician or consulting a detailed statistical textbook.

Poorly executed statistical analysis can invalidate very good research.  It is much better to find someone to help you. However, this page will help you to understand your friendly statistician!

Continue to: Significance and Confidence Intervals Statistical Analysis: Types of Data

See also: Understanding Correlations Understanding Statistical Distributions Averages (Mean, Median and Mode)

How to Write a Hypothesis in 6 Steps, With Examples

A hypothesis is a statement that explains the predictions and reasoning of your research—an “educated guess” about how your scientific experiments will end. As a fundamental part of the scientific method, a good hypothesis is carefully written, but even the simplest ones can be difficult to put into words. 

Want to know how to write a hypothesis for your academic paper ? Below we explain the different types of hypotheses, what a good hypothesis requires, the steps to write your own, and plenty of examples.

Write with confidence Grammarly helps you polish your academic writing Write with Grammarly  

What is a hypothesis? 

One of our 10 essential words for university success , a hypothesis is one of the earliest stages of the scientific method. It’s essentially an educated guess—based on observations—of what the results of your experiment or research will be. 

Some hypothesis examples include:

• If I water plants daily they will grow faster.
• Adults can more accurately guess the temperature than children can. 
• Butterflies prefer white flowers to orange ones.

If you’ve noticed that watering your plants every day makes them grow faster, your hypothesis might be “plants grow better with regular watering.” From there, you can begin experiments to test your hypothesis; in this example, you might set aside two plants, water one but not the other, and then record the results to see the differences. 

The language of hypotheses always discusses variables , or the elements that you’re testing. Variables can be objects, events, concepts, etc.—whatever is observable. 

There are two types of variables: independent and dependent. Independent variables are the ones that you change for your experiment, whereas dependent variables are the ones that you can only observe. In the above example, our independent variable is how often we water the plants and the dependent variable is how well they grow. 

Hypotheses determine the direction and organization of your subsequent research methods, and that makes them a big part of writing a research paper . Ultimately the reader wants to know whether your hypothesis was proven true or false, so it must be written clearly in the introduction and/or abstract of your paper. 

7 examples of hypotheses

Depending on the nature of your research and what you expect to find, your hypothesis will fall into one or more of the seven main categories. Keep in mind that these categories are not exclusive, so the same hypothesis might qualify as several different types. 

1 Simple hypothesis

A simple hypothesis suggests only the relationship between two variables: one independent and one dependent. 

• If you stay up late, then you feel tired the next day. 
• Turning off your phone makes it charge faster. 

2 Complex hypothesis

A complex hypothesis suggests the relationship between more than two variables, for example, two independents and one dependent, or vice versa. 

• People who both (1) eat a lot of fatty foods and (2) have a family history of health problems are more likely to develop heart diseases. 
• Older people who live in rural areas are happier than younger people who live in rural areas. 

3 Null hypothesis

A null hypothesis, abbreviated as H 0 , suggests that there is no relationship between variables. 

• There is no difference in plant growth when using either bottled water or tap water. 
• Professional psychics do not win the lottery more than other people. 

4 Alternative hypothesis

An alternative hypothesis, abbreviated as H 1 or H A , is used in conjunction with a null hypothesis. It states the opposite of the null hypothesis, so that one and only one must be true. 

• Plants grow better with bottled water than tap water. 
• Professional psychics win the lottery more than other people. 

5 Logical hypothesis

A logical hypothesis suggests a relationship between variables without actual evidence. Claims are instead based on reasoning or deduction, but lack actual data.  

• An alien raised on Venus would have trouble breathing in Earth’s atmosphere. 
• Dinosaurs with sharp, pointed teeth were probably carnivores. 

6 Empirical hypothesis

An empirical hypothesis, also known as a “working hypothesis,” is one that is currently being tested. Unlike logical hypotheses, empirical hypotheses rely on concrete data. 

• Customers at restaurants will tip the same even if the wait staff’s base salary is raised. 
• Washing your hands every hour can reduce the frequency of illness. 

7 Statistical hypothesis

A statistical hypothesis is when you test only a sample of a population and then apply statistical evidence to the results to draw a conclusion about the entire population. Instead of testing everything , you test only a portion and generalize the rest based on preexisting data. 

• In humans, the birth-gender ratio of males to females is 1.05 to 1.00.  
• Approximately 2% of the world population has natural red hair. 

What makes a good hypothesis?

No matter what you’re testing, a good hypothesis is written according to the same guidelines. In particular, keep these five characteristics in mind: 

Cause and effect

Hypotheses always include a cause-and-effect relationship where one variable causes another to change (or not change if you’re using a null hypothesis). This can best be reflected as an if-then statement: If one variable occurs, then another variable changes. 

Testable prediction

Most hypotheses are designed to be tested (with the exception of logical hypotheses). Before committing to a hypothesis, make sure you’re actually able to conduct experiments on it. Choose a testable hypothesis with an independent variable that you have absolute control over. 

Independent and dependent variables

Define your variables in your hypothesis so your readers understand the big picture. You don’t have to specifically say which ones are independent and dependent variables, but you definitely want to mention them all. 

Candid language

Writing can easily get convoluted, so make sure your hypothesis remains as simple and clear as possible. Readers use your hypothesis as a contextual pillar to unify your entire paper, so there should be no confusion or ambiguity. If you’re unsure about your phrasing, try reading your hypothesis to a friend to see if they understand. 

Adherence to ethics

It’s not always about what you can test, but what you should test. Avoid hypotheses that require questionable or taboo experiments to keep ethics (and therefore, credibility) intact.

How to write a hypothesis in 6 steps

1 ask a question.

Curiosity has inspired some of history’s greatest scientific achievements, so a good place to start is to ask yourself questions about the world around you. Why are things the way they are? What causes the factors you see around you? If you can, choose a research topic that you’re interested in so your curiosity comes naturally. 

2 Conduct preliminary research

Next, collect some background information on your topic. How much background information you need depends on what you’re attempting. It could require reading several books, or it could be as simple as performing a web search for a quick answer. You don’t necessarily have to prove or disprove your hypothesis at this stage; rather, collect only what you need to prove or disprove it yourself. 

3 Define your variables

Once you have an idea of what your hypothesis will be, select which variables are independent and which are dependent. Remember that independent variables can only be factors that you have absolute control over, so consider the limits of your experiment before finalizing your hypothesis. 

4 Phrase it as an if-then statement

When writing a hypothesis, it helps to phrase it using an if-then format, such as, “ If I water a plant every day, then it will grow better.” This format can get tricky when dealing with multiple variables, but in general, it’s a reliable method for expressing the cause-and-effect relationship you’re testing. 

5  Collect data to support your hypothesis

A hypothesis is merely a means to an end. The priority of any scientific research is the conclusion. Once you have your hypothesis laid out and your variables chosen, you can then begin your experiments. Ideally, you’ll collect data to support your hypothesis, but don’t worry if your research ends up proving it wrong—that’s all part of the scientific method. 

6 Write with confidence

Last, you’ll want to record your findings in a research paper for others to see. This requires a bit of writing know-how, quite a different skill set than conducting experiments. 

That’s where Grammarly can be a major help; our writing suggestions point out not only grammar and spelling mistakes , but also new word choices and better phrasing. While you write, Grammarly automatically recommends optimal language and highlights areas where readers might get confused, ensuring that your hypothesis—and your final paper—are clear and polished.

Choose Your Test

Sat / act prep online guides and tips, what is a hypothesis and how do i write one.

General Education

Think about something strange and unexplainable in your life. Maybe you get a headache right before it rains, or maybe you think your favorite sports team wins when you wear a certain color. If you wanted to see whether these are just coincidences or scientific fact, you would form a hypothesis, then create an experiment to see whether that hypothesis is true or not. 

But what is a hypothesis, anyway? If you’re not sure about what a hypothesis is--or how to test for one!--you’re in the right place. This article will teach you everything you need to know about hypotheses, including: 

• Defining the term “hypothesis” 
• Providing hypothesis examples 
• Giving you tips for how to write your own hypothesis 

So let’s get started!

What Is a Hypothesis?

Merriam Webster defines a hypothesis as “an assumption or concession made for the sake of argument.” In other words, a hypothesis is an educated guess . Scientists make a reasonable assumption--or a hypothesis--then design an experiment to test whether it’s true or not. Keep in mind that in science, a hypothesis should be testable. You have to be able to design an experiment that tests your hypothesis in order for it to be valid. 

As you could assume from that statement, it’s easy to make a bad hypothesis. But when you’re holding an experiment, it’s even more important that your guesses be good...after all, you’re spending time (and maybe money!) to figure out more about your observation. That’s why we refer to a hypothesis as an educated guess--good hypotheses are based on existing data and research to make them as sound as possible.

Hypotheses are one part of what’s called the scientific method .  Every (good) experiment or study is based in the scientific method. The scientific method gives order and structure to experiments and ensures that interference from scientists or outside influences does not skew the results. It’s important that you understand the concepts of the scientific method before holding your own experiment. Though it may vary among scientists, the scientific method is generally made up of six steps (in order):

• Observation
• Asking questions
• Forming a hypothesis
• Analyze the data
• Communicate your results

You’ll notice that the hypothesis comes pretty early on when conducting an experiment. That’s because experiments work best when they’re trying to answer one specific question. And you can’t conduct an experiment until you know what you’re trying to prove!

Independent and Dependent Variables 

After doing your research, you’re ready for another important step in forming your hypothesis: identifying variables. Variables are basically any factor that could influence the outcome of your experiment . Variables have to be measurable and related to the topic being studied.

There are two types of variables:  independent variables and dependent variables. I ndependent variables remain constant . For example, age is an independent variable; it will stay the same, and researchers can look at different ages to see if it has an effect on the dependent variable. 

Speaking of dependent variables... dependent variables are subject to the influence of the independent variable , meaning that they are not constant. Let’s say you want to test whether a person’s age affects how much sleep they need. In that case, the independent variable is age (like we mentioned above), and the dependent variable is how much sleep a person gets. 

Variables will be crucial in writing your hypothesis. You need to be able to identify which variable is which, as both the independent and dependent variables will be written into your hypothesis. For instance, in a study about exercise, the independent variable might be the speed at which the respondents walk for thirty minutes, and the dependent variable would be their heart rate. In your study and in your hypothesis, you’re trying to understand the relationship between the two variables.

Elements of a Good Hypothesis

The best hypotheses start by asking the right questions . For instance, if you’ve observed that the grass is greener when it rains twice a week, you could ask what kind of grass it is, what elevation it’s at, and if the grass across the street responds to rain in the same way. Any of these questions could become the backbone of experiments to test why the grass gets greener when it rains fairly frequently.

As you’re asking more questions about your first observation, make sure you’re also making more observations . If it doesn’t rain for two weeks and the grass still looks green, that’s an important observation that could influence your hypothesis. You'll continue observing all throughout your experiment, but until the hypothesis is finalized, every observation should be noted.

Finally, you should consult secondary research before writing your hypothesis . Secondary research is comprised of results found and published by other people. You can usually find this information online or at your library. Additionally, m ake sure the research you find is credible and related to your topic. If you’re studying the correlation between rain and grass growth, it would help you to research rain patterns over the past twenty years for your county, published by a local agricultural association. You should also research the types of grass common in your area, the type of grass in your lawn, and whether anyone else has conducted experiments about your hypothesis. Also be sure you’re checking the quality of your research . Research done by a middle school student about what minerals can be found in rainwater would be less useful than an article published by a local university.

Writing Your Hypothesis

Once you’ve considered all of the factors above, you’re ready to start writing your hypothesis. Hypotheses usually take a certain form when they’re written out in a research report.

When you boil down your hypothesis statement, you are writing down your best guess and not the question at hand . This means that your statement should be written as if it is fact already, even though you are simply testing it.

The reason for this is that, after you have completed your study, you'll either accept or reject your if-then or your null hypothesis. All hypothesis testing examples should be measurable and able to be confirmed or denied. You cannot confirm a question, only a statement! 

In fact, you come up with hypothesis examples all the time! For instance, when you guess on the outcome of a basketball game, you don’t say, “Will the Miami Heat beat the Boston Celtics?” but instead, “I think the Miami Heat will beat the Boston Celtics.” You state it as if it is already true, even if it turns out you’re wrong. You do the same thing when writing your hypothesis.

Additionally, keep in mind that hypotheses can range from very specific to very broad.  These hypotheses can be specific, but if your hypothesis testing examples involve a broad range of causes and effects, your hypothesis can also be broad.  

The Two Types of Hypotheses

Now that you understand what goes into a hypothesis, it’s time to look more closely at the two most common types of hypothesis: the if-then hypothesis and the null hypothesis.

#1: If-Then Hypotheses

First of all, if-then hypotheses typically follow this formula:

If ____ happens, then ____ will happen.

The goal of this type of hypothesis is to test the causal relationship between the independent and dependent variable. It’s fairly simple, and each hypothesis can vary in how detailed it can be. We create if-then hypotheses all the time with our daily predictions. Here are some examples of hypotheses that use an if-then structure from daily life: 

• If I get enough sleep, I’ll be able to get more work done tomorrow.
• If the bus is on time, I can make it to my friend’s birthday party. 
• If I study every night this week, I’ll get a better grade on my exam. 

In each of these situations, you’re making a guess on how an independent variable (sleep, time, or studying) will affect a dependent variable (the amount of work you can do, making it to a party on time, or getting better grades). 

You may still be asking, “What is an example of a hypothesis used in scientific research?” Take one of the hypothesis examples from a real-world study on whether using technology before bed affects children’s sleep patterns. The hypothesis read s:

“We hypothesized that increased hours of tablet- and phone-based screen time at bedtime would be inversely correlated with sleep quality and child attention.”

It might not look like it, but this is an if-then statement. The researchers basically said, “If children have more screen usage at bedtime, then their quality of sleep and attention will be worse.” The sleep quality and attention are the dependent variables and the screen usage is the independent variable. (Usually, the independent variable comes after the “if” and the dependent variable comes after the “then,” as it is the independent variable that affects the dependent variable.) This is an excellent example of how flexible hypothesis statements can be, as long as the general idea of “if-then” and the independent and dependent variables are present.

#2: Null Hypotheses

Your if-then hypothesis is not the only one needed to complete a successful experiment, however. You also need a null hypothesis to test it against. In its most basic form, the null hypothesis is the opposite of your if-then hypothesis . When you write your null hypothesis, you are writing a hypothesis that suggests that your guess is not true, and that the independent and dependent variables have no relationship .

One null hypothesis for the cell phone and sleep study from the last section might say: 

“If children have more screen usage at bedtime, their quality of sleep and attention will not be worse.” 

In this case, this is a null hypothesis because it’s asking the opposite of the original thesis! 

Conversely, if your if-then hypothesis suggests that your two variables have no relationship, then your null hypothesis would suggest that there is one. So, pretend that there is a study that is asking the question, “Does the amount of followers on Instagram influence how long people spend on the app?” The independent variable is the amount of followers, and the dependent variable is the time spent. But if you, as the researcher, don’t think there is a relationship between the number of followers and time spent, you might write an if-then hypothesis that reads:

“If people have many followers on Instagram, they will not spend more time on the app than people who have less.”

In this case, the if-then suggests there isn’t a relationship between the variables. In that case, one of the null hypothesis examples might say:

“If people have many followers on Instagram, they will spend more time on the app than people who have less.”

You then test both the if-then and the null hypothesis to gauge if there is a relationship between the variables, and if so, how much of a relationship. 

4 Tips to Write the Best Hypothesis

If you’re going to take the time to hold an experiment, whether in school or by yourself, you’re also going to want to take the time to make sure your hypothesis is a good one. The best hypotheses have four major elements in common: plausibility, defined concepts, observability, and general explanation.

#1: Plausibility

At first glance, this quality of a hypothesis might seem obvious. When your hypothesis is plausible, that means it’s possible given what we know about science and general common sense. However, improbable hypotheses are more common than you might think. 

Imagine you’re studying weight gain and television watching habits. If you hypothesize that people who watch more than  twenty hours of television a week will gain two hundred pounds or more over the course of a year, this might be improbable (though it’s potentially possible). Consequently, c ommon sense can tell us the results of the study before the study even begins.

Improbable hypotheses generally go against  science, as well. Take this hypothesis example: 

“If a person smokes one cigarette a day, then they will have lungs just as healthy as the average person’s.” 

This hypothesis is obviously untrue, as studies have shown again and again that cigarettes negatively affect lung health. You must be careful that your hypotheses do not reflect your own personal opinion more than they do scientifically-supported findings. This plausibility points to the necessity of research before the hypothesis is written to make sure that your hypothesis has not already been disproven.

#2: Defined Concepts

The more advanced you are in your studies, the more likely that the terms you’re using in your hypothesis are specific to a limited set of knowledge. One of the hypothesis testing examples might include the readability of printed text in newspapers, where you might use words like “kerning” and “x-height.” Unless your readers have a background in graphic design, it’s likely that they won’t know what you mean by these terms. Thus, it’s important to either write what they mean in the hypothesis itself or in the report before the hypothesis.

Here’s what we mean. Which of the following sentences makes more sense to the common person?

If the kerning is greater than average, more words will be read per minute.

If the space between letters is greater than average, more words will be read per minute.

For people reading your report that are not experts in typography, simply adding a few more words will be helpful in clarifying exactly what the experiment is all about. It’s always a good idea to make your research and findings as accessible as possible. 

Good hypotheses ensure that you can observe the results. 

#3: Observability

In order to measure the truth or falsity of your hypothesis, you must be able to see your variables and the way they interact. For instance, if your hypothesis is that the flight patterns of satellites affect the strength of certain television signals, yet you don’t have a telescope to view the satellites or a television to monitor the signal strength, you cannot properly observe your hypothesis and thus cannot continue your study.

Some variables may seem easy to observe, but if you do not have a system of measurement in place, you cannot observe your hypothesis properly. Here’s an example: if you’re experimenting on the effect of healthy food on overall happiness, but you don’t have a way to monitor and measure what “overall happiness” means, your results will not reflect the truth. Monitoring how often someone smiles for a whole day is not reasonably observable, but having the participants state how happy they feel on a scale of one to ten is more observable. 

In writing your hypothesis, always keep in mind how you'll execute the experiment.

#4: Generalizability 

Perhaps you’d like to study what color your best friend wears the most often by observing and documenting the colors she wears each day of the week. This might be fun information for her and you to know, but beyond you two, there aren’t many people who could benefit from this experiment. When you start an experiment, you should note how generalizable your findings may be if they are confirmed. Generalizability is basically how common a particular phenomenon is to other people’s everyday life.

Let’s say you’re asking a question about the health benefits of eating an apple for one day only, you need to realize that the experiment may be too specific to be helpful. It does not help to explain a phenomenon that many people experience. If you find yourself with too specific of a hypothesis, go back to asking the big question: what is it that you want to know, and what do you think will happen between your two variables?

Hypothesis Testing Examples

We know it can be hard to write a good hypothesis unless you’ve seen some good hypothesis examples. We’ve included four hypothesis examples based on some made-up experiments. Use these as templates or launch pads for coming up with your own hypotheses.

Experiment #1: Students Studying Outside (Writing a Hypothesis)

You are a student at PrepScholar University. When you walk around campus, you notice that, when the temperature is above 60 degrees, more students study in the quad. You want to know when your fellow students are more likely to study outside. With this information, how do you make the best hypothesis possible?

You must remember to make additional observations and do secondary research before writing your hypothesis. In doing so, you notice that no one studies outside when it’s 75 degrees and raining, so this should be included in your experiment. Also, studies done on the topic beforehand suggested that students are more likely to study in temperatures less than 85 degrees. With this in mind, you feel confident that you can identify your variables and write your hypotheses:

If-then: “If the temperature in Fahrenheit is less than 60 degrees, significantly fewer students will study outside.”

Null: “If the temperature in Fahrenheit is less than 60 degrees, the same number of students will study outside as when it is more than 60 degrees.”

These hypotheses are plausible, as the temperatures are reasonably within the bounds of what is possible. The number of people in the quad is also easily observable. It is also not a phenomenon specific to only one person or at one time, but instead can explain a phenomenon for a broader group of people.

To complete this experiment, you pick the month of October to observe the quad. Every day (except on the days where it’s raining)from 3 to 4 PM, when most classes have released for the day, you observe how many people are on the quad. You measure how many people come  and how many leave. You also write down the temperature on the hour. 

After writing down all of your observations and putting them on a graph, you find that the most students study on the quad when it is 70 degrees outside, and that the number of students drops a lot once the temperature reaches 60 degrees or below. In this case, your research report would state that you accept or “failed to reject” your first hypothesis with your findings.

Experiment #2: The Cupcake Store (Forming a Simple Experiment)

Let’s say that you work at a bakery. You specialize in cupcakes, and you make only two colors of frosting: yellow and purple. You want to know what kind of customers are more likely to buy what kind of cupcake, so you set up an experiment. Your independent variable is the customer’s gender, and the dependent variable is the color of the frosting. What is an example of a hypothesis that might answer the question of this study?

Here’s what your hypotheses might look like: 

If-then: “If customers’ gender is female, then they will buy more yellow cupcakes than purple cupcakes.”

Null: “If customers’ gender is female, then they will be just as likely to buy purple cupcakes as yellow cupcakes.”

This is a pretty simple experiment! It passes the test of plausibility (there could easily be a difference), defined concepts (there’s nothing complicated about cupcakes!), observability (both color and gender can be easily observed), and general explanation ( this would potentially help you make better business decisions ).

Experiment #3: Backyard Bird Feeders (Integrating Multiple Variables and Rejecting the If-Then Hypothesis)

While watching your backyard bird feeder, you realized that different birds come on the days when you change the types of seeds. You decide that you want to see more cardinals in your backyard, so you decide to see what type of food they like the best and set up an experiment. 

However, one morning, you notice that, while some cardinals are present, blue jays are eating out of your backyard feeder filled with millet. You decide that, of all of the other birds, you would like to see the blue jays the least. This means you'll have more than one variable in your hypothesis. Your new hypotheses might look like this: 

If-then: “If sunflower seeds are placed in the bird feeders, then more cardinals will come than blue jays. If millet is placed in the bird feeders, then more blue jays will come than cardinals.”

Null: “If either sunflower seeds or millet are placed in the bird, equal numbers of cardinals and blue jays will come.”

Through simple observation, you actually find that cardinals come as often as blue jays when sunflower seeds or millet is in the bird feeder. In this case, you would reject your “if-then” hypothesis and “fail to reject” your null hypothesis . You cannot accept your first hypothesis, because it’s clearly not true. Instead you found that there was actually no relation between your different variables. Consequently, you would need to run more experiments with different variables to see if the new variables impact the results.

Experiment #4: In-Class Survey (Including an Alternative Hypothesis)

You’re about to give a speech in one of your classes about the importance of paying attention. You want to take this opportunity to test a hypothesis you’ve had for a while: 

If-then: If students sit in the first two rows of the classroom, then they will listen better than students who do not.

Null: If students sit in the first two rows of the classroom, then they will not listen better or worse than students who do not.

You give your speech and then ask your teacher if you can hand out a short survey to the class. On the survey, you’ve included questions about some of the topics you talked about. When you get back the results, you’re surprised to see that not only do the students in the first two rows not pay better attention, but they also scored worse than students in other parts of the classroom! Here, both your if-then and your null hypotheses are not representative of your findings. What do you do?

This is when you reject both your if-then and null hypotheses and instead create an alternative hypothesis . This type of hypothesis is used in the rare circumstance that neither of your hypotheses is able to capture your findings . Now you can use what you’ve learned to draft new hypotheses and test again! 

Key Takeaways: Hypothesis Writing

The more comfortable you become with writing hypotheses, the better they will become. The structure of hypotheses is flexible and may need to be changed depending on what topic you are studying. The most important thing to remember is the purpose of your hypothesis and the difference between the if-then and the null . From there, in forming your hypothesis, you should constantly be asking questions, making observations, doing secondary research, and considering your variables. After you have written your hypothesis, be sure to edit it so that it is plausible, clearly defined, observable, and helpful in explaining a general phenomenon.

Writing a hypothesis is something that everyone, from elementary school children competing in a science fair to professional scientists in a lab, needs to know how to do. Hypotheses are vital in experiments and in properly executing the scientific method . When done correctly, hypotheses will set up your studies for success and help you to understand the world a little better, one experiment at a time.

What’s Next?

If you’re studying for the science portion of the ACT, there’s definitely a lot you need to know. We’ve got the tools to help, though! Start by checking out our ultimate study guide for the ACT Science subject test. Once you read through that, be sure to download our recommended ACT Science practice tests , since they’re one of the most foolproof ways to improve your score. (And don’t forget to check out our expert guide book , too.)

If you love science and want to major in a scientific field, you should start preparing in high school . Here are the science classes you should take to set yourself up for success.

If you’re trying to think of science experiments you can do for class (or for a science fair!), here’s a list of 37 awesome science experiments you can do at home

Need more help with this topic? Check out Tutorbase!

Our vetted tutor database includes a range of experienced educators who can help you polish an essay for English or explain how derivatives work for Calculus. You can use dozens of filters and search criteria to find the perfect person for your needs.

Ashley Sufflé Robinson has a Ph.D. in 19th Century English Literature. As a content writer for PrepScholar, Ashley is passionate about giving college-bound students the in-depth information they need to get into the school of their dreams.

Student and Parent Forum

Our new student and parent forum, at ExpertHub.PrepScholar.com , allow you to interact with your peers and the PrepScholar staff. See how other students and parents are navigating high school, college, and the college admissions process. Ask questions; get answers.

Ask a Question Below

Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!

Improve With Our Famous Guides

• For All Students

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 160+ SAT Points

How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section:

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading

Score 800 on SAT Writing

Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section:

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading

Score 600 on SAT Writing

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For?

15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay

The 5 Strategies You Must Be Using to Improve 4+ ACT Points

How to Get a Perfect 36 ACT, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section:

36 on ACT English

36 on ACT Math

36 on ACT Reading

36 on ACT Science

Series: How to Get to 24 on Each ACT Section:

24 on ACT English

24 on ACT Math

24 on ACT Reading

24 on ACT Science

What ACT target score should you be aiming for?

ACT Vocabulary You Must Know

ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide

Should you retake your SAT or ACT?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Looking for Graduate School Test Prep?

Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here:

GRE Online Prep Blog

GMAT Online Prep Blog

TOEFL Online Prep Blog

Holly R. "I am absolutely overjoyed and cannot thank you enough for helping me!”

• Social Anxiety Disorder
• Bipolar Disorder
• Kids Mental Health
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Relationships in 2023
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support
• Piaget's Theory
• Sensorimotor Stage
• Preoperational Stage
• Concrete Operational Stage
• Formal Operational Stage
• Support and Criticism

Piaget's 4 Stages of Cognitive Development Explained

Background and Key Concepts of Piaget's Theory

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Important Cognitive Development Concepts

• Next in Stages of Cognitive Development Guide The Sensorimotor Stage of Cognitive Development

Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development suggests that children move through four different stages of learning. His theory focuses not only on understanding how children acquire knowledge, but also on understanding the nature of intelligence. Piaget's stages are:

• Sensorimotor stage : Birth to 2 years
• Preoperational stage : Ages 2 to 7
• Concrete operational stage : Ages 7 to 11
• Formal operational stage : Ages 12 and up

Piaget believed that children take an active role in the learning process, acting much like little scientists as they perform experiments, make observations, and learn about the world. As kids interact with the world around them, they continually add new knowledge, build upon existing knowledge, and adapt previously held ideas to accommodate new information.

History of Piaget's Theory of Cognitive Development

Piaget was born in Switzerland in the late 1800s and was a precocious student, publishing his first scientific paper when he was just 11 years old. His early exposure to the intellectual development of children came when he worked as an assistant to Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon as they worked to standardize their famous IQ test .

Piaget vs. Vygotsky

Piaget's theory differs in important ways from those of Lev Vygotsky , another influential figure in the field of child development. Vygotsky acknowledged the roles that curiosity and active involvement play in learning, but placed greater emphasis on society and culture.

Piaget felt that development is largely fueled from within, while Vygotsky believed that external factors (such as culture) and people (such as parents, caregivers, and peers) play a more significant role.

Much of Piaget's interest in the cognitive development of children was inspired by his observations of his own nephew and daughter. These observations reinforced his budding hypothesis that children's minds were not merely smaller versions of adult minds.

Until this point in history, children were largely treated simply as smaller versions of adults. Piaget was one of the first to identify that the way that children think is different from the way adults think.

Piaget proposed that intelligence grows and develops through a series of stages. Older children do not just think more quickly than younger children. Instead, there are both qualitative and quantitative differences between the thinking of young children versus older children.

Based on his observations, he concluded that children were not less intelligent than adults—they simply think differently. Albert Einstein called Piaget's discovery "so simple only a genius could have thought of it."

Piaget's stage theory describes the  cognitive development of children . Cognitive development involves changes in cognitive process and abilities. In Piaget's view, early cognitive development involves processes based upon actions and later progresses to changes in mental operations.

The Sensorimotor Stage of Cognitive Development

During this earliest stage of cognitive development, infants and toddlers acquire knowledge through sensory experiences and manipulating objects. A child's entire experience at the earliest period of this stage occurs through basic reflexes, senses, and motor responses.

Birth to 2 Years

Major characteristics and developmental changes during this stage:

• Know the world through movements and sensations
• Learn about the world through basic actions such as sucking, grasping, looking, and listening
• Learn that things continue to exist even when they cannot be seen ( object permanence )
• Realize that they are separate beings from the people and objects around them
• Realize that their actions can cause things to happen in the world around them

During the sensorimotor stage, children go through a period of dramatic growth and learning. As kids interact with their environment, they continually make new discoveries about how the world works.

The cognitive development that occurs during this period takes place over a relatively short time and involves a great deal of growth. Children not only learn how to perform physical actions such as crawling and walking; they also learn a great deal about language from the people with whom they interact. Piaget also broke this stage down into substages. Early representational thought emerges during the final part of the sensorimotor stage.

Piaget believed that developing  object permanence  or object constancy, the understanding that objects continue to exist even when they cannot be seen, was an important element at this point of development.

By learning that objects are separate and distinct entities and that they have an existence of their own outside of individual perception, children are then able to begin to attach names and words to objects.

The Preoperational Stage of Cognitive Development

The foundations of language development may have been laid during the previous stage, but the emergence of language is one of the major hallmarks of the preoperational stage of development.

2 to 7 Years

• Begin to think symbolically and learn to use words and pictures to represent objects
• Tend to be egocentric and struggle to see things from the perspective of others
• Getting better with language and thinking, but still tend to think in very concrete terms

At this stage, kids learn through pretend play but still struggle with logic and taking the point of view of other people. They also often struggle with understanding the idea of constancy.

Children become much more skilled at pretend play during this stage of development, yet they continue to think very concretely about the world around them. 

For example, a researcher might take a lump of clay, divide it into two equal pieces, and then give a child the choice between two pieces of clay to play with. One piece of clay is rolled into a compact ball while the other is smashed into a flat pancake shape. Because the flat shape  looks  larger, the preoperational child will likely choose that piece, even though the two pieces are exactly the same size.

The Concrete Operational Stage of Cognitive Development

While children are still very concrete and literal in their thinking at this point in development, they become much more adept at using logic.   The egocentrism of the previous stage begins to disappear as kids become better at thinking about how other people might view a situation.

7 to 11 Years

• Begin to think logically about concrete events
• Begin to understand the concept of conservation; that the amount of liquid in a short, wide cup is equal to that in a tall, skinny glass, for example
• Thinking becomes more logical and organized, but still very concrete
• Begin using inductive logic, or reasoning from specific information to a general principle

While thinking becomes much more logical during the concrete operational state, it can also be very rigid. Kids at this point in development tend to struggle with abstract and hypothetical concepts.

During this stage, children also become less egocentric and begin to think about how other people might think and feel. Kids in the concrete operational stage also begin to understand that their thoughts are unique to them and that not everyone else necessarily shares their thoughts, feelings, and opinions.

The Formal Operational Stage of Cognitive Development

The final stage of Piaget's theory involves an increase in logic, the ability to use deductive reasoning, and an understanding of abstract ideas. At this point, adolescents and young adults become capable of seeing multiple potential solutions to problems and think more scientifically about the world around them.

Age 12 and Up

Major characteristics and developmental changes during this time:

• Begins to think abstractly and reason about hypothetical problems
• Begins to think more about moral, philosophical, ethical, social, and political issues that require theoretical and abstract reasoning
• Begins to use deductive logic, or reasoning from a general principle to specific information

The ability to thinking about abstract ideas and situations is the key hallmark of the formal operational stage of cognitive development. The ability to systematically plan for the future and reason about hypothetical situations are also critical abilities that emerge during this stage. 

It is important to note that Piaget did not view children's intellectual development as a quantitative process. That is, kids do not just add more information and knowledge to their existing knowledge as they get older.

Instead, Piaget suggested that there is a qualitative change in how children think as they gradually process through these four stages. At age 7, children don't just have more information about the world than they did at age 2; there is a fundamental change in  how  they think about the world.

Piaget suggested several factors that influence how children learn and grow.

A schema describes both the mental and physical actions involved in understanding and knowing. Schemas are categories of knowledge that help us to interpret and understand the world.

In Piaget's view, a schema includes both a category of knowledge and the process of obtaining that knowledge. As experiences happen, this new information is used to modify, add to, or change previously existing schemas.

For example, a child may have a schema about a type of animal, such as a dog. If the child's sole experience has been with small dogs, a child might believe that all dogs are small, furry, and have four legs. Suppose then that the child encounters an enormous dog. The child will take in this new information, modifying the previously existing schema to include these new observations.

Assimilation

The process of taking in new information into our already existing schemas is known as assimilation. The process is somewhat subjective because we tend to modify experiences and information slightly to fit in with our preexisting beliefs. In the example above, seeing a dog and labeling it "dog" is a case of assimilating the animal into the child's dog schema.

Accommodation

Another part of adaptation is the ability to change existing schemas in light of new information; this process is known as accommodation. New schemas may also be developed during this process.

Equilibration

As children progress through the stages of cognitive development, it is important to maintain a balance between applying previous knowledge (assimilation) and changing behavior to account for new knowledge (accommodation).

Piaget believed that all children try to strike a balance between assimilation and accommodation using a mechanism he called equilibration. Equilibration helps explain how children can move from one stage of thought to the next.

One of the main points of Piaget's theory is that creating knowledge and intelligence is an inherently  active  process.

"I find myself opposed to the view of knowledge as a passive copy of reality," Piaget wrote. "I believe that knowing an object means acting upon it, constructing systems of transformations that can be carried out on or with this object. Knowing reality means constructing systems of transformations that correspond, more or less adequately, to reality."

Piaget's theory of cognitive development helped add to our understanding of children's intellectual growth. It also stressed that children were not merely passive recipients of knowledge. Instead, kids are constantly investigating and experimenting as they build their understanding of how the world works.

Hugar SM, Kukreja P, Assudani HG, Gokhale N. Evaluation of the relevance of Piaget's cognitive principles among parented and orphan children in Belagavi City, Karnataka, India: A comparative study . I nt J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2017;10(4):346-350. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1463

Malik F. Cognitive development . In: StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing.

Scott HK. Piaget . In: StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing.

Fischer KW, Bullock D. Cognitive development in school-age children: Conclusions and new directions . In: Development During Middle Childhood: The Years From Six to Twelve. National Academies Press.

Sobel AA, Resick PA, Rabalais AE. The effect of cognitive processing therapy on cognitions: impact statement coding . J Trauma Stress. 2009;22(3):205-11. doi:10.1002/jts.20408

Piaget J. The Essential Piaget. Gruber HE, Voneche JJ. eds. Basic Books.

Fancher RE, Rutherford A. Pioneers of Psychology: A History . W.W. Norton.

Santrock JW. A Topical Approach to Lifespan Development (8th ed.) . McGraw-Hill.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.

How is a hypothesis developed and evaluated?

📚 Related Questions

I don't understand this

What makes silver and gold different in atom and element term

Is an electron dense or not?

The electron is a subatomic particle, symbol  e−  or  β− , with a negative elementary electric charge.[8] Electrons belong to the first generation of the lepton particle family,[9] and are generally thought to be elementary particles because they have no known components or substructure.[1]The electron has a mass that is approximately 1/1836 that of the proton.[10] Quantum mechanical properties of the electron include an intrinsicangular momentum (spin) of a half-integer value in units of ħ. This means that it is a fermion, and so no two electrons can occupy the same quantum state, in accordance with the Pauli exclusion principle.[9] Like all matter, electrons have properties of both particles and waves: they can collide with other particles and can be diffracted like light. The wave properties of electrons are easier to observe with experiments than those of other particles like neutrons and protons because electrons have a lower mass and hence a larger De Broglie wavelength for a given energy.

Electrons play an essential role in numerous physical phenomena, such as electricity, magnetism, and thermal conductivity, and they also participate in gravitational, electromagnetic and weak interactions.[11] Since an electron has charge, it has a surrounding electric field, and an electron moving relative to an observer generates a magnetic field. External electromagnetic fields affect an electron according to the Lorentz force law. Electrons radiate or absorb energy in the form of photons when accelerated. Laboratory instruments are capable of containing individual electrons as well as electron plasma using electromagnetic fields. Special telescopes can detect electron plasma in outer space. Electrons are involved in many applications such as electronics, welding, cathode ray tubes, electron microscopes, radiation therapy, lasers,gaseous ionization detectors and particle accelerators.

Interactions involving electrons and other subatomic particles are of interest in fields such as chemistry and nuclear physics. The Coulomb force interaction between positive protons inside atomic nuclei and negative electrons composes atoms. Ionization or changes in the proportions of particles changes the binding energy of an atomic system. The exchange or sharing of the electrons between two or more atoms is the main cause of chemical bonding.[12] British natural philosopher Richard Laming first hypothesized the concept of an indivisible quantity of electric charge to explain the chemical properties of atoms in 1838;[3] Irish physicist George Johnstone Stoney named this charge 'electron' in 1891, and J. J. Thomson and his team of British physicists identified it as a particle in 1897.[5][13][14] Electrons can also participate in nuclear reactions, such as nucleosynthesis in stars, where they are known as beta particles. Electrons can be created through beta decay ofradioactive isotopes and in high-energy collisions, for instance when cosmic rays enter the atmosphere. The antiparticle of the electron is called the positron; it is identical to the electron except that it carries electrical and other charges of the opposite sign. When an electron collides with a positron, both particles can be totally annihilated, producing gamma ray photons.

The backbone of a sugar molecule is _________ a carbon b oxygen c sulfur d nitrogen

The backbone of a sugar molecule is _________​

Answer : a) carbon

Explanation : Sugars are biomolecules consisting of carbon (C), hydrogen (H) and oxygen (O) atoms. They are carbohydrates, so its structure backbone is based in carbon .

​Hope this helps!

[tex]\textit{\textbf{Spymore}}[/tex]​​

Details : The backbone of a sugar molecule is _________ a carbon b oxygen c

And active alkaline earth Metal with 56 protons

help me on this please

What would the mass be for 500 ml of water?

Why doesn’t a stable ecosystem have more tertiary consumers than primary consumers?

Details : Why doesnt a stable ecosystem have more tertiary consumers than primary

Is mint chocolate chip ice cream an element or compound

what could you do to change the volume of gas

Answer: In order to change the volume of a gas, its pressure or temperature can be changed. If the temperature is raised, then the volume of the gas would increase. On the other hand, if the pressure is increased, then the volume of the gas would decrease.

Explanation:

identify the main source of energy used by most organisms

Write the word or phrase beginning with each letter of the word CHANGE

Details : Write the word or phrase beginning with each letter of the word CHANGE

is athletes foot abiotic or biotic?

How does the DNA of prokayotic and eukaryotic cells differ?

What are some ways population size is limited within an ecosystem?

what does chemical reaction describe

Details : what does chemical reaction describe

I am trying to complete a circuit with a battery, wires, liquid and a lightbulb. I completed the circuit but water doesn't conduct electricity. I also tried salt water but that also doesn't conduct electricity for me either. Why?

How many valence electrons do nitrogen atoms have

some infrared radiation reaches earth and sum does not with part does reach earth longer wave length or short wave length

explain why it is important for dying cells to be properly removed

Details : explain why it is important for dying cells to be properly removed

Help me plz! Name and classify Kr and Xe. A. Krypton and xenon are nonmetals and noble gases. B.Kromine and xerolon are ductile, transition metals. C.Krypton and xenneth are main group, alkaline metals. D.Kryptonium and xenolith are rare, conductive metalloids.

According to the electronic configuration, Krypton and xenon are nonmetals and noble gases.

What is electronic configuration?

Electronic configuration is defined as the distribution of electrons which are present in an atom or molecule in atomic or molecular orbitals.It describes how each electron moves independently in an orbital.

Knowledge of electronic configuration is necessary for understanding the structure of periodic table. It helps in understanding the chemical properties of elements.

Elements undergo chemical reactions in order to achieve stability. Main group elements obey the octet rule in their electronic configuration while the transition elements follow the 18 electron rule. Noble elements have valence shell complete in ground state and hence are said to be stable.

Learn more about electronic configuration ,here:

https://brainly.com/question/29757010

is this the correct Lewis Dot Structure for SO2?? PLEASE HELP

How do you ocean floor features such as trenches a mid ocean ridges form

Plate tectonics

The features of the ocean floor are formed by plate tectonics: converging plates, diverging plates, and subduction.

Which two parts of the earth system is a paleontologist involved in?

Details : Which two parts of the earth system is a paleontologist involved

what does it mean for a sulution to be saturated?

Transfer of heat by the flow of a heated material

Houses with carpet are much quieter than houses with tile or hardwood floors because of sound wave A) absorption. B) diffraction. C) reflection. D) refraction.

The answer is A

What is true about the structure or function of the plasma membrane

Details : What is true about the structure or function of the plasma membrane

The concentration of a solution can be changed by _______ solute.

help me with 4,5 plz

Other Questions

• cannonballs are stacked in a pyramid shape with a triangular base of 5 cannonballs on a side.How many cannonballs in all are in the stack?
• We went to forever 21 and bought shoes,shorts,skirts,and more. We started with 475.25.We left with the amount of -225.How much did we spend?
• Which of the following passages best expresses Mark Twain's purpose in ''A Cub Pilot''?A. He{a pilot} must have good and quick judgment and decision, and a cool, calm courage that no peril can shake.B. Your shouldn't have allowed me or anybody else to shake your confidence in that knowledge. Try to remember that. C. I had become a good steersman; so good, indeed, that I had all the work to do on our watch, night and day. D. There is one faculty which a pilot must incessantly cultivate until he has brought it to absolute perfection. Nothing short of perfection will do. That faculty is memory .
• The sum of three consecutive even numbers is 162.What is the smallest of the three numbers?
• Lisa is 10 centimeters taller than her friend Ian. Ian is 14 centimeters taller than Jim. Every month, their heights increase by 2 centimeters. In 7 months the sum of Ian's and Jim's heights will be 170 centimeters more than Lisa's height. How tall is Ian now?
• I don't understand this
• conclusiones sobre la importancia de los movimientos de la tierra
• use backcountry in a sentence
• Even negative numbers from -24 to -10
• a line in the xy plane passes through the origin and has a slope of 6 which of the following points lies on the line
• all of the doctors blank have followed their mothers example and have studied medicine too
• How do you express -2 as a product of a positive and a negative integer?
• All vertical lines are perpendicular to what type of line??
• Find the equation of the line that is parallel to x=18 and passes through the point (-8,8)
• When RNA from a specific strain of TMV is mixed with coat protein from the same strain, infectious virions are formed
• a bird stalks, kills, and then kill, and then eats an insect. Based on its behavior, which pair of ecological terms describes the bird?
• read the follwing sentences from no dogs bark are you crying, ignacio? the memory of your mother makes you cry, doesnt it? but you never did anything for her. you always repaid us badly. somehow your body got filled with evil instead of affection. which of the following words best describes the speakers tone? a) aggravated b) judgmental c) offended d) pleading
• which microscope magnification should be used to observe the largest field of view of an insect wing?
• amelia is documenting the height of sunflower plants each week. she has determined the function to be f(x) = 3x 3, where x represents time and f(x) represents the height of the plant. which of the following options describes the restrictions to the domain (x) and range f(x) correctly? domain, nonnegative values; range, values greater than or equal to 3 domain, nonnegative values; range, values greater than 1 domain, nonnegative values; range, values less than 1 domain, nonnegative values; range, values less than or equal to 3
• What powers are given to the president through the checks and balances system

How it works

For Business

Join Mind Tools

Article • 8 min read

Developing Self-Awareness

Understanding yourself.

By the Mind Tools Content Team

"It is wisdom to know others; it is enlightenment to know one's self."– Lao-Tzu, Chinese philosopher

Key Takeaways

Self-awareness is a valuable quality in both professional and personal life.

It involves the ability to look inwards, in order to accurately assess your behavior – and the thoughts and feelings that influence it.

Self-awareness helps you to understand your strengths and weaknesses, and is a key driver of high performance at work.

Have you ever worked with someone who was very self-aware?

This person considered the needs and feelings of others, took responsibility for her mistakes, was humble about her strengths, never said thoughtless things, and was aware of how her words and actions affected others.

Put simply, this person was great to work with!

Self-awareness is one of the most important qualities that you can have as a leader, and developing self-awareness is important in both your personal and professional life.

In this article, we'll look at self-awareness in more detail, and we'll explore how you can develop yours.

Self-Awareness Definition

Researchers Shelley Duval and Robert Wicklund published the first major theory of self-awareness in the early 1970s. They said that self-awareness is the ability to look inward, think deeply about your behavior, and consider how it aligns with your moral standards and values.

They argued that when your behavior is out of alignment with your standards, you feel uncomfortable, unhappy and negative. By contrast, when your behavior and values are aligned, you feel positive and self-confident. Self-awareness also gives you a deeper understanding of your own attitudes, opinions, and knowledge.

Self-awareness is sometimes confused with self-consciousness, but there's an important difference between these. Self-consciousness is a hyper-sensitized state of self-awareness; it's the excessive preoccupation with your own manners, behavior, or appearance, and is often seen as negative. Self-awareness is focused on the impact your behavior has on other people, and, as such, is much more positive.

Self-awareness is one of the most important elements of emotional intelligence . It gives you the ability to understand and control your own emotions and actions, and it helps you understand how these affect the emotions and actions of others.

Benefits of Self-Awareness

Self-awareness brings benefits in both your personal and professional life.

First, research shows a strong link between self-awareness and high-performance in managers. You're simply more effective in a leadership role when you understand your internal state, as well as your team members' emotions.

If you're aware of your own strengths and weaknesses, you have the power to use your strengths intentionally and to manage or eliminate your weaknesses. When you can admit what you don't know – and you have the humility to ask for help when you need it – you increase your credibility with your team.

Knowing your strengths and weaknesses also has positive, long-term benefits for your career, as well as for your long-term health and happiness. In one study , researchers found that leaders who were aware of their strengths were more self-confident, were more highly paid, and were happier at work.

On a personal level, having self-awareness allows you to approach people and situations with confidence. In turn, this means that you gain control of your own life, direction, and experiences.

How to Develop Self-Awareness

There are several ways to develop self-awareness. Keep in mind, however, that this takes time and work.

1. Know Your Strengths and Weaknesses

You can start building self-awareness by learning where you are strongest and weakest. Conduct a Personal SWOT Analysis to get a better understanding of this. You might also want to take the StrengthsFinder self-test, which helps you identify your five greatest strengths.

When you understand how your personality compares with the personalities of other people, you can discover what motivates you, and how you relate to the world. Both of these are important aspects of self-awareness.

This is where personality tests such as the Big Five Personality Model and Myers-Briggs® can be valuable tools for self-discovery.

2. Reflect on the Impact You Have

When you are self-aware, you understand how you instinctively think, connect with other people, communicate, and make decisions.

A great way to understand these things is to keep a journal, where you write about your day, the things that you did, the emotions you experienced and expressed, and the consequences of these. This helps you think about what does and doesn't work for you, and helps you be more aware of your impact on other people.

Alternatively, take a break for five or 10 minutes a day and meditate. Meditation helps broaden and strengthen your self-awareness, and it can also lower stress.

Or take time in the evening to reflect quietly about your day, and think about how effectively you worked with people. What did you do really well? And what could you have done better?

3. Focus on Others

People who are self-aware are conscious of how their words and actions influence others.

To become more aware of how you affect others, learn how to manage your emotions . Take time to weigh what you say carefully, and think about how it will affect the person that you're speaking to.

If you find yourself taking your stress, anger, or frustrations out on others, stop immediately. Instead, see if you can find something positive about the situation. Take a few deep breaths, or even walk away if you find that you can't control your emotions.

When you manage your own words or actions, it doesn't mean that you're being false. Rather, it shows that you care about other people enough not to say or do something that might affect them in a negative way.

Showing humility is an important part of this. When you're humble, you focus your attention and energy on others and not on yourself.

4. Ask for Feedback

Getting feedback is important for developing self-awareness – after all, this is often the only way that you can find out about issues that you may not be able to face directly. (See our article on the Johari Window for more on this.)

You can get feedback from your colleagues and team members, either with direct questions or with 360° Feedback . When you ask for feedback from the people around you, this gives you a chance to see your behavior from their point of view. What's more, it can help you identify weaknesses that you can't see, or that you'd prefer to ignore.

By developing self-awareness, you get to know what does and doesn't work for you, and you learn how to manage your impact on other people.

People with high levels of self-awareness are more effective as leaders because they deal with people positively, and they inspire trust and credibility in their team members.

As a result, these people also often have more satisfying careers and higher incomes.

To develop self-awareness, learn about your strengths and weaknesses. Take time to analyze the decisions that you make, focus on managing your emotions, and be humble about your accomplishments.

Apply This to Your Life

• Schedule some time to meditate. Find a quiet place where you can sit down, and take a few minutes to meditate properly.
• Buy a journal. In the evening, set aside a few minutes to reflect quietly about your day, and then write down your thoughts. If you can, do this as soon as you get in, as the events of your day will be fresh in your mind.

Silvia, P.J. and Duvall, S.T. (2001) Objective Self-Awareness Theory: Recent Progress and Enduring Problems. Personality and Psychology Review . Volume 5. (Available here .)

Church, A.H. (1997) Managerial Self-Awareness in High-Performing Individuals in Organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology . Volume 82. Issue 2. April 1997. (Available here .)

Rath, T. and Conchi, B. (2008) Finding Your Leadership Strengths; Why Effective Leaders Must Possess a High Level of Self-Awareness. Gallup Management Journal . December 2008. (Available here .)

You've accessed 1 of your 2 free resources.

Get unlimited access

Discover more content

10 common leadership and management mistakes.

Avoiding Universal Pitfalls

Total Quality Management (TQM)

Delivering Quality at Every Level

Add comment

Comments (0)

Be the first to comment!

Sign-up to our newsletter

Subscribing to the Mind Tools newsletter will keep you up-to-date with our latest updates and newest resources.

Subscribe now

Business Skills

Personal Development

Leadership and Management

Most Popular

Newest Releases

Thinking About Flexible Working

How to Work Effectively With Consultants

Mind Tools Store

About Mind Tools Content

Discover something new today

What is strategy.

The Three Levels of Strategy

Improving Physical Health and Wellbeing at Work

Avoiding the Dangers of Sitting Down

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

Boosting Your People Skills

Self-Assessment

What's Your Leadership Style?

Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

Recommended for you

Due diligence – an introduction.

Get the Full Picture Before Doing the Deal

4-Step Action Plans Video

Video Transcript

Business Operations and Process Management

Strategy Tools

Customer Service

Business Ethics and Values

Handling Information and Data

Project Management

Knowledge Management

Self-Development and Goal Setting

Time Management

Presentation Skills

Learning Skills

Career Skills

Communication Skills

Negotiation, Persuasion and Influence

Working With Others

Difficult Conversations

Creativity Tools

Self-Management

Work-Life Balance

Stress Management and Wellbeing

Coaching and Mentoring

Change Management

Team Management

Managing Conflict

Delegation and Empowerment

Performance Management

Leadership Skills

Developing Your Team

Talent Management

Problem Solving

Decision Making

Relationship Development Intervention (RDI)   What is the theory...

Relationship Development Intervention (RDI)

What is the theory behind this intervention? Why would someone use it?

Who is this intervention designed for (types of children or communication/behavior issues)? 

How is this intervention done and by whom? Include a description of some of the techniques.

What is the expected outcome, and how long should it take to achieve it?

Answer & Explanation

We will discuss the given query regarding  Relationship Development Intervention , and will give you samples and insights for you to base on; 

1. The theory behind Relationship Development Intervention (RDI) is based on the belief that individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) have difficulties in developing and maintaining meaningful relationships. RDI aims to address these challenges by focusing on the development of dynamic intelligence, which involves the ability to adapt and respond to changing social situations. The intervention emphasizes the importance of fostering authentic, reciprocal relationships and improving the individual's social and emotional understanding. This intervention is used to support individuals with ASD in their social development and enhance their quality of life. It aims to help individuals with ASD develop essential social skills, including joint attention, perspective-taking, emotional regulation, flexible thinking, and problem-solving abilities. By targeting these areas, RDI seeks to improve the individual's overall social competence and create a foundation for successful relationships. 

2. RDI is designed for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) who struggle with social communication and interaction. It can be beneficial for individuals across the autism spectrum, from those with mild to severe impairments. RDI is particularly suited for individuals who have the potential to develop social skills but require structured guidance and support. 

3. RDI is typically conducted by trained professionals, such as certified RDI consultants or therapists, who work closely with the individual and their family. The intervention involves a collaborative approach, with the consultant guiding and coaching the child's parents or caregivers to facilitate social interactions and promote relationship development. 

Some of the techniques used in RDI include:

- Guided Participation: The consultant works with the child and their family to engage in purposeful activities that promote joint attention, shared experiences, and collaboration. This may involve structured play sessions, daily routines, or specific social situations. 

- Dynamic Intelligence Exercises: These exercises focus on developing the individual's ability to adapt and respond flexibly to social situations. The consultant may create scenarios or challenges that require the child to think critically, problem-solve, and consider multiple perspectives. 

- Emotional Referencing: The consultant helps the child develop emotional awareness and understanding by providing explicit feedback and guidance during emotional situations. This involves labeling emotions, discussing emotional experiences, and supporting the child in regulating their emotions. 

Example: During a play session, the RDI consultant may guide the child and their parent in engaging in a pretend play activity, such as setting up a tea party. The consultant may prompt the parent to model social interactions, such as offering the child a cup of tea and waiting for a response. The consultant will provide feedback and support in real-time, encouraging the child to initiate, respond, and engage in reciprocal interactions. 

4. The expected outcome of RDI is the development of improved social skills, enhanced social awareness, and the ability to form and maintain meaningful relationships. The timeline for achieving these outcomes can vary depending on the individual's starting point, age, and level of engagement in the intervention. RDI is typically viewed as a long-term intervention that requires ongoing support and practice. Progress can be seen in several months to a few years, but it is important to note that every individual's progress is unique, and the duration of the intervention may vary.

Approach to solving the question: Explained the topic on Relationship Development Intervention, also did based it on scholarly sources and references.

Related Q&A

• Q  . Problem 10 (10p) Give one possible DFS traversal starting from node 0 of the graph below, printing the nodes both as ... Answered over 90d ago
• Q Meghan believes that she needs a 15% capacity cushion because of the variability in guests arrival. Given that cushion, ... Answered over 90d ago
• Q If you were to examine the relationship between the government and the economy in the United State today, which of the f... Answered 54d ago
• Q Cybersecurity Governance: Recommend a cybersecurity leadership plan, improvements to management processes, and a cyberse... Answered over 90d ago
• Q     I need help with all of these questions. A3 1. Write a short program that shows that the following two code blocks a... Answered over 90d ago
• Q Critically analyse the effect of external environment of Tesla, and evaluate the impact of at least two key environmenta... Answered over 90d ago
• Q  . Question 16(Mulliple Choice Worth 1 points) (0501 MC) What is the effect of the government increasing social welfare ... Answered over 90d ago
• Q There is Parent company and their Sub Company that was acquired on the 1st of July 2022. Now that the financial year is ... Answered 30d ago
• Q I need the code of this assignment. Write a class called StringClassifier that displzays information about the keystrokes... Answered over 90d ago
• Q Can I use your help! Answers without explanation please!!. MC 21. This eight-element array must be sorted in increasing ... Answered over 90d ago
• Q Read the follow case study and answer the questionns-  Introduction The Jones family case is a mother of four children, ... Answered over 90d ago
• Q you should consider establishing a hypothetical strategic planning committee made up of the major stakeholders in the in... Answered over 90d ago
• Q  . This Wi the &quot;company &quot; div. Add a DOM Node to the Document Try This 9-1 This project allows you to practice... Answered over 90d ago
• Q The Fourth Lateran Council consolidated the victories of the Church and the moral and political authority of the papacy.... Answered over 90d ago
• Q Part 1      Part 2     . Balance Sheet The account balances of Zenith Travel Service for the year ended August 31, 20Y4,... Answered over 90d ago
• Q I only need help with part a,b and c. Recall that the Fibonacci numbers are the numbers 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55... Answered over 90d ago
• googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display('footerCliffsnotesAd'); }); CliffsNotes study guides are written by real teachers and professors, so no matter what you're studying, CliffsNotes can ease your homework headaches and help you score high on exams. About CliffsNotes