significance of hypothesis in research

Public Health Notes

Your partner for better health, hypothesis in research: definition, types and importance .

April 21, 2020 Kusum Wagle Epidemiology 0

Table of Contents

What is Hypothesis?

• Hypothesis is a logical prediction of certain occurrences without the support of empirical confirmation or evidence.
• In scientific terms, it is a tentative theory or testable statement about the relationship between two or more variables i.e. independent and dependent variable.

Different Types of Hypothesis:

1. Simple Hypothesis:

• A Simple hypothesis is also known as composite hypothesis.
• In simple hypothesis all parameters of the distribution are specified.
• It predicts relationship between two variables i.e. the dependent and the independent variable

2. Complex Hypothesis:

• A Complex hypothesis examines relationship between two or more independent variables and two or more dependent variables.

3. Working or Research Hypothesis:

• A research hypothesis is a specific, clear prediction about the possible outcome of a scientific research study based on specific factors of the population.

4. Null Hypothesis:

• A null hypothesis is a general statement which states no relationship between two variables or two phenomena. It is usually denoted by H 0 .

5. Alternative Hypothesis:

• An alternative hypothesis is a statement which states some statistical significance between two phenomena. It is usually denoted by H 1 or H A .

6. Logical Hypothesis:

• A logical hypothesis is a planned explanation holding limited evidence.

7. Statistical Hypothesis:

• A statistical hypothesis, sometimes called confirmatory data analysis, is an assumption about a population parameter.

Although there are different types of hypothesis, the most commonly and used hypothesis are Null hypothesis and alternate hypothesis . So, what is the difference between null hypothesis and alternate hypothesis? Let’s have a look:

Major Differences Between Null Hypothesis and Alternative Hypothesis:

Importance of Hypothesis:

• It ensures the entire research methodologies are scientific and valid.
• It helps to assume the probability of research failure and progress.
• It helps to provide link to the underlying theory and specific research question.
• It helps in data analysis and measure the validity and reliability of the research.
• It provides a basis or evidence to prove the validity of the research.
• It helps to describe research study in concrete terms rather than theoretical terms.

Characteristics of Good Hypothesis:

• Should be simple.
• Should be specific.
• Should be stated in advance.

References and For More Information:

https://ocw.jhsph.edu/courses/StatisticalReasoning1/PDFs/2009/BiostatisticsLecture4.pdf

https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-type-i-and-type-ii-errors.html

https://www.khanacademy.org/math/ap-statistics/tests-significance-ap/error-probabilities-power/a/consequences-errors-significance

https://stattrek.com/hypothesis-test/hypothesis-testing.aspx

http://davidmlane.com/hyperstat/A2917.html

https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-a-hypothesis-definition-lesson-quiz.html

https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-null-and-alternative-hypothesis.html

https://blog.minitab.com/blog/adventures-in-statistics-2/understanding-hypothesis-tests-why-we-need-to-use-hypothesis-tests-in-statistics

• Characteristics of Good Hypothesis
• complex hypothesis
• example of alternative hypothesis
• example of null hypothesis
• how is null hypothesis different to alternative hypothesis
• Importance of Hypothesis
• null hypothesis vs alternate hypothesis
• simple hypothesis
• Types of Hypotheses
• what is alternate hypothesis
• what is alternative hypothesis
• what is hypothesis?
• what is logical hypothesis
• what is null hypothesis
• what is research hypothesis
• what is statistical hypothesis
• why is hypothesis necessary

Copyright © 2024 | WordPress Theme by MH Themes

• 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

Consensus GPT vs. SciSpace GPT: Choose the Best GPT for Research

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

Types of Essays in Academic Writing - Quick Guide (2024)

7 Types of Research Hypothesis: Examples, Significance and Step-By-Step Guide

Introduction.

In any research study, a research hypothesis plays a crucial role in guiding the investigation and providing a clear direction for the research. It is an essential component of a thesis as it helps to frame the research question and determine the methodology to be used.

This article will provide a detailed analysis of research hypotheses in a thesis, highlighting their significance and qualities. It will also explore different types of research hypotheses and provide illustrative examples. Additionally, a step-by-step guide to developing research hypotheses and methods for testing and validating them will be discussed. By the end of this article, readers will have a comprehensive understanding of research hypotheses and their role in a thesis.

Understanding Research Hypotheses in a Thesis

A research hypothesis is a statement of expectation or prediction that will be tested by research. In a thesis, a research hypothesis is formulated to address the research question or problem statement . It serves as a tentative answer or explanation to the research question. The research hypothesis guides the direction of the study and helps in determining the research design and methodology.

The research hypothesis is typically based on existing theories, previous research findings, or observations. It is formulated after a thorough review of the literature and understanding of the research area. A well-defined research hypothesis provides a clear focus for the study and helps in generating testable predictions. By testing the research hypothesis, researchers aim to gather evidence to support or reject the hypothesis. This process contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field and helps in drawing meaningful conclusions.

Significance of Research Hypotheses in a Thesis

One of the key significance of research hypotheses is that they help in organizing and structuring the research study. By formulating a hypothesis, the researcher defines the specific research question and identifies the variables that will be investigated. This helps in narrowing down the scope of the study and ensures that the research is focused and targeted.

Moreover, research hypotheses provide a framework for data collection and analysis. They guide the researcher in selecting appropriate research methods , tools, and techniques to gather relevant data. The hypotheses also help in determining the statistical tests and analysis techniques that will be used to analyze the collected data.

Another significance of research hypotheses is that they contribute to the advancement of knowledge in a particular field. By formulating hypotheses and conducting research to test them, researchers are able to generate new insights, theories, and explanations. This contributes to the existing body of knowledge and helps in expanding the understanding of a specific phenomenon or topic.

Furthermore, research hypotheses are important for establishing the validity and reliability of the research findings. By formulating clear and testable hypotheses, researchers can ensure that their study is based on sound scientific principles. The hypotheses provide a basis for evaluating the accuracy and generalizability of the research results.

In addition, research hypotheses are essential for making informed decisions and recommendations based on the research findings. They help in drawing conclusions and making predictions about the relationship between variables. This information can be used to inform policy decisions, develop interventions, or guide future research in the field.

Qualities of an Effective Research Hypothesis in a Thesis

An effective research hypothesis in a thesis possesses several key qualities that contribute to its strength and validity. These qualities are essential for ensuring that the hypothesis can be tested and validated through empirical research. The following are some of the qualities that make a research hypothesis effective:

1. Specificity: A good research hypothesis is specific and clearly defines the variables and the relationship between them. It provides a clear direction for the research and allows for precise testing of the hypothesis.

2. Testability: An effective hypothesis in research is testable, meaning that it can be empirically examined and either supported or refuted through data analysis. It should be possible to design experiments or collect data that can provide evidence for or against the hypothesis.

3. Clarity: A research hypothesis should be written in clear and concise language. It should avoid ambiguity and ensure that the intended meaning is easily understood by the readers. Clear language helps in communicating the hypothesis effectively and facilitates its evaluation.

4. Falsifiability: A strong research hypothesis is falsifiable, which means that it is possible to prove it wrong. It should be formulated in a way that allows for the possibility of obtaining evidence that contradicts the hypothesis. This is important for the scientific process as it encourages critical thinking and the exploration of alternative explanations.

5. Relevance: An effective research hypothesis is relevant to the research question and the overall objectives of the study. It should address a significant gap in knowledge or contribute to the existing body of literature. A relevant hypothesis adds value to the research and increases its significance.

6. Novelty: A good research hypothesis is original and innovative. It should propose a new idea or approach that has not been extensively explored before. Novelty in the hypothesis increases the potential for new discoveries and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field.

7. Coherence: An effective research hypothesis should be coherent and consistent with existing theories, concepts, and empirical evidence. It should align with the current understanding of the topic and build upon previous research. Coherence ensures that the hypothesis is grounded in a solid foundation and enhances its credibility.

8. Measurability: A research hypothesis should be measurable, meaning that it can be quantitatively or qualitatively assessed. It should be possible to collect data or evidence that can be used to evaluate the hypothesis. Measurability allows for objective testing and increases the reliability of the research findings.

By incorporating these qualities into the formulation of a research hypothesis, researchers can enhance the validity and reliability of their study.

Different Types of Research Hypotheses in a Thesis

In a thesis, there are several different types of research hypotheses that can be used to test the relationship between variables. These hypotheses provide a framework for the research and guide the direction of the study. Understanding the different types of research hypotheses is essential for conducting a comprehensive and effective thesis.

Null Hypothesis

The null hypothesis is a statement that suggests there is no significant relationship between the variables being studied. It assumes that any observed differences or relationships are due to chance or random variation. The null hypothesis is denoted as H0 and is often used as a starting point for hypothesis testing.

Alternative Hypothesis

The alternative hypothesis, also known as the research hypothesis, is a statement that suggests there is a significant relationship between the variables being studied. It contradicts the null hypothesis and proposes that the observed differences or relationships are not due to chance.

Directional Hypothesis

A directional hypothesis is a specific type of alternative hypothesis that predicts the direction of the relationship between variables. It states that there is a positive or negative relationship between the variables, indicating the direction of the effect.

Non-Directional Hypothesis

In contrast to a directional hypothesis, a non-directional hypothesis does not predict the direction of the relationship between variables. It simply states that there is a relationship between the variables without specifying the direction of the effect.

Statistical Hypothesis

A statistical hypothesis is a hypothesis that is formulated based on statistical analysis. It involves using statistical tests to determine the likelihood of the observed data occurring under the null hypothesis.

Associative Hypothesis

An associative hypothesis suggests that there is a relationship between variables, but it does not imply causation. It indicates that changes in one variable are associated with changes in another variable.

Causal Hypothesis

A causal hypothesis proposes a cause-and-effect relationship between variables. It suggests that changes in one variable directly cause changes in another variable.

These different types of research hypotheses provide researchers with various options to explore and test the relationships between variables in a thesis. The choice of hypothesis depends on the research question, the nature of the variables, and the available data.

Illustrative Examples of Research Hypotheses in a Thesis

To better understand research hypotheses in a thesis, let’s explore some illustrative examples. These examples will demonstrate how hypotheses are formulated and tested in different research studies.

Example 1: Hypothesis for a study on the effects of exercise on weight loss:

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in weight loss between individuals who engage in regular exercise and those who do not.

Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Individuals who engage in regular exercise will experience greater weight loss compared to those who do not exercise.

Example 2: Hypothesis for a study on the impact of social media on self-esteem:

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between social media usage and self-esteem levels.

Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Increased social media usage is associated with lower self-esteem levels.

Example 3: Hypothesis for a study on the effectiveness of a new teaching method in improving student performance:

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in student performance between the traditional teaching method and the new teaching method.

Alternative Hypothesis (H1): The new teaching method leads to improved student performance compared to the traditional teaching method.

These examples highlight the structure of research hypotheses, where the null hypothesis represents no effect or relationship, while the alternative hypothesis suggests the presence of an effect or relationship. It is important to note that these hypotheses are testable and can be analyzed using appropriate statistical methods.

Step-by-Step Guide to Developing Research Hypotheses in a Thesis

Developing a research hypothesis is a crucial step in the process of conducting a thesis. In this section, we will provide a step-by-step guide to developing research hypotheses in a thesis.

Step 1: Identify the Research Topic

The first step in developing a research hypothesis is to clearly identify the research topic. This involves understanding the research problem and determining the specific area of study.

Step 2: Conduct Preliminary Research

Once the research topic is identified, it is important to conduct preliminary research to gather relevant information. This helps in understanding the existing knowledge and identifying any gaps or areas that need further investigation.

Step 3: Formulate the Research Question

Based on the preliminary research, formulate a clear and concise research question. The research question should be specific and focused, addressing the research problem identified in step 1.

Step 4: Define the Variables

Identify the variables that will be studied in the research. Variables are the factors or concepts that are being measured or manipulated in the study. It is important to clearly define the variables to ensure the research hypothesis is specific and testable.

Step 5: Predict the Relationship and Outcome

The research hypothesis should propose a link between the variables and predict the expected outcome. It should clearly state the expected relationship between the variables and the anticipated result.

Step 6: Ensure Clarity and Conciseness

A good research hypothesis should be simple and concise, avoiding wordiness. It should be clear and free from ambiguity or assumptions about the readers’ knowledge. The hypothesis should also be observable and measurable.

Step 7: Validate the Hypothesis

Before finalizing the research hypothesis, it is important to validate it. This can be done through further research, literature review , or consultation with experts in the field. Validating the hypothesis ensures its relevance and novelty.

By following these step-by-step guidelines, researchers can develop effective research hypotheses for their theses. A well-developed hypothesis provides a solid foundation for the research and helps in generating meaningful results.

Methods for Testing and Validating Research Hypotheses in a Thesis

Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world. It allows you to statistically test your predictions. The usual process is to make a hypothesis, create an experiment to test it, run the experiment, draw a conclusion, and then allow other researchers to replicate the study to validate the findings. There are several methods for testing and validating research hypotheses in a thesis.

Experimental Research

One common method is experimental research, where researchers manipulate variables and measure their effects on the dependent variable.

Observational Research

Another method is observational research, where researchers observe and record data without manipulating variables. This method is often used when it is not feasible or ethical to conduct experiments.

Survey Research

Survey research is another method that involves collecting data from a sample of individuals using questionnaires or interviews . This method is useful for studying attitudes, opinions, and behaviors.

Conducting Meta-analysis

In addition to these methods, researchers can also use existing data or conduct meta-analyses to test and validate research hypotheses. Existing data can be obtained from sources such as government databases, previous studies, or publicly available datasets. Meta-analysis involves combining the results of multiple studies to determine the overall effect size and to test the generalizability of findings across different populations and contexts. Once the data is collected, researchers can use statistical analysis techniques to analyze the data and test the research hypotheses. Common statistical tests include t-tests, analysis of variance (ANOVA), regression analysis, and chi-square tests.

The choice of statistical test depends on the research design, the type of data collected, and the specific research hypotheses being tested. It is important to note that testing and validating research hypotheses is an iterative process. Researchers may need to refine their hypotheses, modify their research design, or collect additional data based on the initial findings. By using rigorous methods for testing and validating research hypotheses, researchers can ensure the reliability and validity of their findings, contributing to the advancement of knowledge in their field.

In conclusion, research hypotheses are essential components of a thesis that guide the research process and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in a particular field. By formulating clear and testable hypotheses, researchers can make meaningful contributions to their field and address important research questions. It is important for researchers to carefully develop and validate their hypotheses to ensure the credibility and reliability of their findings.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

How to Formulate Research Questions in a Research Proposal? Discover The No. 1 Easiest Template Here!

7 Easy Step-By-Step Guide of Using ChatGPT: The Best Literature Review Generator for Time-Saving Academic Research

Writing Engaging Introduction in Research Papers : 7 Tips and Tricks!

Understanding Comparative Frameworks: Their Importance, Components, Examples and 8 Best Practices

Revolutionizing Effective Thesis Writing for PhD Students Using Artificial Intelligence!

3 Types of Interviews in Qualitative Research: An Essential Research Instrument and Handy Tips to Conduct Them

Highlight Abstracts: An Ultimate Guide For Researchers!

Crafting Critical Abstracts: 11 Expert Strategies for Summarizing Research

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

What is a Research Hypothesis: How to Write it, Types, and Examples

Any research begins with a research question and a research hypothesis . A research question alone may not suffice to design the experiment(s) needed to answer it. A hypothesis is central to the scientific method. But what is a hypothesis ? A hypothesis is a testable statement that proposes a possible explanation to a phenomenon, and it may include a prediction. Next, you may ask what is a research hypothesis ? Simply put, a research hypothesis is a prediction or educated guess about the relationship between the variables that you want to investigate.  

It is important to be thorough when developing your research hypothesis. Shortcomings in the framing of a hypothesis can affect the study design and the results. A better understanding of the research hypothesis definition and characteristics of a good hypothesis will make it easier for you to develop your own hypothesis for your research. Let’s dive in to know more about the types of research hypothesis , how to write a research hypothesis , and some research hypothesis examples .  

Table of Contents

What is a hypothesis ?  

A hypothesis is based on the existing body of knowledge in a study area. Framed before the data are collected, a hypothesis states the tentative relationship between independent and dependent variables, along with a prediction of the outcome.  

What is a research hypothesis ?  

Young researchers starting out their journey are usually brimming with questions like “ What is a hypothesis ?” “ What is a research hypothesis ?” “How can I write a good research hypothesis ?”   

A research hypothesis is a statement that proposes a possible explanation for an observable phenomenon or pattern. It guides the direction of a study and predicts the outcome of the investigation. A research hypothesis is testable, i.e., it can be supported or disproven through experimentation or observation.     

Characteristics of a good hypothesis  

Here are the characteristics of a good hypothesis :  

• Clearly formulated and free of language errors and ambiguity  
• Concise and not unnecessarily verbose  
• Has clearly defined variables  
• Testable and stated in a way that allows for it to be disproven  
• Can be tested using a research design that is feasible, ethical, and practical   
• Specific and relevant to the research problem  
• Rooted in a thorough literature search  
• Can generate new knowledge or understanding.  

How to create an effective research hypothesis  

A study begins with the formulation of a research question. A researcher then performs background research. This background information forms the basis for building a good research hypothesis . The researcher then performs experiments, collects, and analyzes the data, interprets the findings, and ultimately, determines if the findings support or negate the original hypothesis.  

Let’s look at each step for creating an effective, testable, and good research hypothesis :  

• Identify a research problem or question: Start by identifying a specific research problem.   
• Review the literature: Conduct an in-depth review of the existing literature related to the research problem to grasp the current knowledge and gaps in the field.   
• Formulate a clear and testable hypothesis : Based on the research question, use existing knowledge to form a clear and testable hypothesis . The hypothesis should state a predicted relationship between two or more variables that can be measured and manipulated. Improve the original draft till it is clear and meaningful.  
• State the null hypothesis: The null hypothesis is a statement that there is no relationship between the variables you are studying.   
• Define the population and sample: Clearly define the population you are studying and the sample you will be using for your research.  
• Select appropriate methods for testing the hypothesis: Select appropriate research methods, such as experiments, surveys, or observational studies, which will allow you to test your research hypothesis .  

Remember that creating a research hypothesis is an iterative process, i.e., you might have to revise it based on the data you collect. You may need to test and reject several hypotheses before answering the research problem.  

How to write a research hypothesis  

When you start writing a research hypothesis , you use an “if–then” statement format, which states the predicted relationship between two or more variables. Clearly identify the independent variables (the variables being changed) and the dependent variables (the variables being measured), as well as the population you are studying. Review and revise your hypothesis as needed.  

An example of a research hypothesis in this format is as follows:  

“ If [athletes] follow [cold water showers daily], then their [endurance] increases.”  

Population: athletes  

Independent variable: daily cold water showers  

Dependent variable: endurance  

You may have understood the characteristics of a good hypothesis . But note that a research hypothesis is not always confirmed; a researcher should be prepared to accept or reject the hypothesis based on the study findings.  

Research hypothesis checklist  

Following from above, here is a 10-point checklist for a good research hypothesis :  

• Testable: A research hypothesis should be able to be tested via experimentation or observation.  
• Specific: A research hypothesis should clearly state the relationship between the variables being studied.  
• Based on prior research: A research hypothesis should be based on existing knowledge and previous research in the field.  
• Falsifiable: A research hypothesis should be able to be disproven through testing.  
• Clear and concise: A research hypothesis should be stated in a clear and concise manner.  
• Logical: A research hypothesis should be logical and consistent with current understanding of the subject.  
• Relevant: A research hypothesis should be relevant to the research question and objectives.  
• Feasible: A research hypothesis should be feasible to test within the scope of the study.  
• Reflects the population: A research hypothesis should consider the population or sample being studied.  
• Uncomplicated: A good research hypothesis is written in a way that is easy for the target audience to understand.  

By following this research hypothesis checklist , you will be able to create a research hypothesis that is strong, well-constructed, and more likely to yield meaningful results.  

Types of research hypothesis  

Different types of research hypothesis are used in scientific research:  

1. Null hypothesis:

A null hypothesis states that there is no change in the dependent variable due to changes to the independent variable. This means that the results are due to chance and are not significant. A null hypothesis is denoted as H0 and is stated as the opposite of what the alternative hypothesis states.   

Example: “ The newly identified virus is not zoonotic .”  

2. Alternative hypothesis:

This states that there is a significant difference or relationship between the variables being studied. It is denoted as H1 or Ha and is usually accepted or rejected in favor of the null hypothesis.  

Example: “ The newly identified virus is zoonotic .”  

3. Directional hypothesis :

This specifies the direction of the relationship or difference between variables; therefore, it tends to use terms like increase, decrease, positive, negative, more, or less.   

Example: “ The inclusion of intervention X decreases infant mortality compared to the original treatment .”   

4. Non-directional hypothesis:

While it does not predict the exact direction or nature of the relationship between the two variables, a non-directional hypothesis states the existence of a relationship or difference between variables but not the direction, nature, or magnitude of the relationship. A non-directional hypothesis may be used when there is no underlying theory or when findings contradict previous research.  

Example, “ Cats and dogs differ in the amount of affection they express .”  

5. Simple hypothesis :

A simple hypothesis only predicts the relationship between one independent and another independent variable.  

Example: “ Applying sunscreen every day slows skin aging .”  

6 . Complex hypothesis :

A complex hypothesis states the relationship or difference between two or more independent and dependent variables.   

Example: “ Applying sunscreen every day slows skin aging, reduces sun burn, and reduces the chances of skin cancer .” (Here, the three dependent variables are slowing skin aging, reducing sun burn, and reducing the chances of skin cancer.)  

7. Associative hypothesis:  

An associative hypothesis states that a change in one variable results in the change of the other variable. The associative hypothesis defines interdependency between variables.  

Example: “ There is a positive association between physical activity levels and overall health .”  

8 . Causal hypothesis:

A causal hypothesis proposes a cause-and-effect interaction between variables.  

Example: “ Long-term alcohol use causes liver damage .”  

Note that some of the types of research hypothesis mentioned above might overlap. The types of hypothesis chosen will depend on the research question and the objective of the study.  

Research hypothesis examples  

Here are some good research hypothesis examples :  

“The use of a specific type of therapy will lead to a reduction in symptoms of depression in individuals with a history of major depressive disorder.”  

“Providing educational interventions on healthy eating habits will result in weight loss in overweight individuals.”  

“Plants that are exposed to certain types of music will grow taller than those that are not exposed to music.”  

“The use of the plant growth regulator X will lead to an increase in the number of flowers produced by plants.”  

Characteristics that make a research hypothesis weak are unclear variables, unoriginality, being too general or too vague, and being untestable. A weak hypothesis leads to weak research and improper methods.   

Some bad research hypothesis examples (and the reasons why they are “bad”) are as follows:  

“This study will show that treatment X is better than any other treatment . ” (This statement is not testable, too broad, and does not consider other treatments that may be effective.)  

“This study will prove that this type of therapy is effective for all mental disorders . ” (This statement is too broad and not testable as mental disorders are complex and different disorders may respond differently to different types of therapy.)  

“Plants can communicate with each other through telepathy . ” (This statement is not testable and lacks a scientific basis.)  

Importance of testable hypothesis  

If a research hypothesis is not testable, the results will not prove or disprove anything meaningful. The conclusions will be vague at best. A testable hypothesis helps a researcher focus on the study outcome and understand the implication of the question and the different variables involved. A testable hypothesis helps a researcher make precise predictions based on prior research.  

To be considered testable, there must be a way to prove that the hypothesis is true or false; further, the results of the hypothesis must be reproducible.  

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on research hypothesis  

1. What is the difference between research question and research hypothesis ?  

A research question defines the problem and helps outline the study objective(s). It is an open-ended statement that is exploratory or probing in nature. Therefore, it does not make predictions or assumptions. It helps a researcher identify what information to collect. A research hypothesis , however, is a specific, testable prediction about the relationship between variables. Accordingly, it guides the study design and data analysis approach.

2. When to reject null hypothesis ?

A null hypothesis should be rejected when the evidence from a statistical test shows that it is unlikely to be true. This happens when the test statistic (e.g., p -value) is less than the defined significance level (e.g., 0.05). Rejecting the null hypothesis does not necessarily mean that the alternative hypothesis is true; it simply means that the evidence found is not compatible with the null hypothesis.  

3. How can I be sure my hypothesis is testable?  

A testable hypothesis should be specific and measurable, and it should state a clear relationship between variables that can be tested with data. To ensure that your hypothesis is testable, consider the following:  

• Clearly define the key variables in your hypothesis. You should be able to measure and manipulate these variables in a way that allows you to test the hypothesis.  
• The hypothesis should predict a specific outcome or relationship between variables that can be measured or quantified.   
• You should be able to collect the necessary data within the constraints of your study.  
• It should be possible for other researchers to replicate your study, using the same methods and variables.   
• Your hypothesis should be testable by using appropriate statistical analysis techniques, so you can draw conclusions, and make inferences about the population from the sample data.  
• The hypothesis should be able to be disproven or rejected through the collection of data.  

4. How do I revise my research hypothesis if my data does not support it?  

If your data does not support your research hypothesis , you will need to revise it or develop a new one. You should examine your data carefully and identify any patterns or anomalies, re-examine your research question, and/or revisit your theory to look for any alternative explanations for your results. Based on your review of the data, literature, and theories, modify your research hypothesis to better align it with the results you obtained. Use your revised hypothesis to guide your research design and data collection. It is important to remain objective throughout the process.  

5. I am performing exploratory research. Do I need to formulate a research hypothesis?  

As opposed to “confirmatory” research, where a researcher has some idea about the relationship between the variables under investigation, exploratory research (or hypothesis-generating research) looks into a completely new topic about which limited information is available. Therefore, the researcher will not have any prior hypotheses. In such cases, a researcher will need to develop a post-hoc hypothesis. A post-hoc research hypothesis is generated after these results are known.  

6. How is a research hypothesis different from a research question?

A research question is an inquiry about a specific topic or phenomenon, typically expressed as a question. It seeks to explore and understand a particular aspect of the research subject. In contrast, a research hypothesis is a specific statement or prediction that suggests an expected relationship between variables. It is formulated based on existing knowledge or theories and guides the research design and data analysis.

7. Can a research hypothesis change during the research process?

Yes, research hypotheses can change during the research process. As researchers collect and analyze data, new insights and information may emerge that require modification or refinement of the initial hypotheses. This can be due to unexpected findings, limitations in the original hypotheses, or the need to explore additional dimensions of the research topic. Flexibility is crucial in research, allowing for adaptation and adjustment of hypotheses to align with the evolving understanding of the subject matter.

8. How many hypotheses should be included in a research study?

The number of research hypotheses in a research study varies depending on the nature and scope of the research. It is not necessary to have multiple hypotheses in every study. Some studies may have only one primary hypothesis, while others may have several related hypotheses. The number of hypotheses should be determined based on the research objectives, research questions, and the complexity of the research topic. It is important to ensure that the hypotheses are focused, testable, and directly related to the research aims.

9. Can research hypotheses be used in qualitative research?

Yes, research hypotheses can be used in qualitative research, although they are more commonly associated with quantitative research. In qualitative research, hypotheses may be formulated as tentative or exploratory statements that guide the investigation. Instead of testing hypotheses through statistical analysis, qualitative researchers may use the hypotheses to guide data collection and analysis, seeking to uncover patterns, themes, or relationships within the qualitative data. The emphasis in qualitative research is often on generating insights and understanding rather than confirming or rejecting specific research hypotheses through statistical testing.

Editage All Access is a subscription-based platform that unifies the best AI tools and services designed to speed up, simplify, and streamline every step of a researcher’s journey. The Editage All Access Pack is a one-of-a-kind subscription that unlocks full access to an AI writing assistant, literature recommender, journal finder, scientific illustration tool, and exclusive discounts on professional publication services from Editage.  

Based on 22+ years of experience in academia, Editage All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $14 a month !    

Related Posts

Join Us for Peer Review Week 2024

How Editage All Access is Boosting Productivity for Academics in India

What Is A Research (Scientific) Hypothesis? A plain-language explainer + examples

By:  Derek Jansen (MBA)  | Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2020

If you’re new to the world of research, or it’s your first time writing a dissertation or thesis, you’re probably noticing that the words “research hypothesis” and “scientific hypothesis” are used quite a bit, and you’re wondering what they mean in a research context .

“Hypothesis” is one of those words that people use loosely, thinking they understand what it means. However, it has a very specific meaning within academic research. So, it’s important to understand the exact meaning before you start hypothesizing. 

Research Hypothesis 101

• What is a hypothesis ?
• What is a research hypothesis (scientific hypothesis)?
• Requirements for a research hypothesis
• Definition of a research hypothesis
• The null hypothesis

What is a hypothesis?

Let’s start with the general definition of a hypothesis (not a research hypothesis or scientific hypothesis), according to the Cambridge Dictionary:

Hypothesis: an idea or explanation for something that is based on known facts but has not yet been proved.

In other words, it’s a statement that provides an explanation for why or how something works, based on facts (or some reasonable assumptions), but that has not yet been specifically tested . For example, a hypothesis might look something like this:

Hypothesis: sleep impacts academic performance.

This statement predicts that academic performance will be influenced by the amount and/or quality of sleep a student engages in – sounds reasonable, right? It’s based on reasonable assumptions , underpinned by what we currently know about sleep and health (from the existing literature). So, loosely speaking, we could call it a hypothesis, at least by the dictionary definition.

But that’s not good enough…

Unfortunately, that’s not quite sophisticated enough to describe a research hypothesis (also sometimes called a scientific hypothesis), and it wouldn’t be acceptable in a dissertation, thesis or research paper . In the world of academic research, a statement needs a few more criteria to constitute a true research hypothesis .

What is a research hypothesis?

A research hypothesis (also called a scientific hypothesis) is a statement about the expected outcome of a study (for example, a dissertation or thesis). To constitute a quality hypothesis, the statement needs to have three attributes – specificity , clarity and testability .

Let’s take a look at these more closely.

Need a helping hand?

Hypothesis Essential #1: Specificity & Clarity

A good research hypothesis needs to be extremely clear and articulate about both what’ s being assessed (who or what variables are involved ) and the expected outcome (for example, a difference between groups, a relationship between variables, etc.).

Let’s stick with our sleepy students example and look at how this statement could be more specific and clear.

Hypothesis: Students who sleep at least 8 hours per night will, on average, achieve higher grades in standardised tests than students who sleep less than 8 hours a night.

As you can see, the statement is very specific as it identifies the variables involved (sleep hours and test grades), the parties involved (two groups of students), as well as the predicted relationship type (a positive relationship). There’s no ambiguity or uncertainty about who or what is involved in the statement, and the expected outcome is clear.

Contrast that to the original hypothesis we looked at – “Sleep impacts academic performance” – and you can see the difference. “Sleep” and “academic performance” are both comparatively vague , and there’s no indication of what the expected relationship direction is (more sleep or less sleep). As you can see, specificity and clarity are key.

Hypothesis Essential #2: Testability (Provability)

A statement must be testable to qualify as a research hypothesis. In other words, there needs to be a way to prove (or disprove) the statement. If it’s not testable, it’s not a hypothesis – simple as that.

For example, consider the hypothesis we mentioned earlier:

Hypothesis: Students who sleep at least 8 hours per night will, on average, achieve higher grades in standardised tests than students who sleep less than 8 hours a night.  

We could test this statement by undertaking a quantitative study involving two groups of students, one that gets 8 or more hours of sleep per night for a fixed period, and one that gets less. We could then compare the standardised test results for both groups to see if there’s a statistically significant difference. 

Again, if you compare this to the original hypothesis we looked at – “Sleep impacts academic performance” – you can see that it would be quite difficult to test that statement, primarily because it isn’t specific enough. How much sleep? By who? What type of academic performance?

So, remember the mantra – if you can’t test it, it’s not a hypothesis 🙂

Defining A Research Hypothesis

You’re still with us? Great! Let’s recap and pin down a clear definition of a hypothesis.

A research hypothesis (or scientific hypothesis) is a statement about an expected relationship between variables, or explanation of an occurrence, that is clear, specific and testable.

So, when you write up hypotheses for your dissertation or thesis, make sure that they meet all these criteria. If you do, you’ll not only have rock-solid hypotheses but you’ll also ensure a clear focus for your entire research project.

What about the null hypothesis?

You may have also heard the terms null hypothesis , alternative hypothesis, or H-zero thrown around. At a simple level, the null hypothesis is the counter-proposal to the original hypothesis.

For example, if the hypothesis predicts that there is a relationship between two variables (for example, sleep and academic performance), the null hypothesis would predict that there is no relationship between those variables.

At a more technical level, the null hypothesis proposes that no statistical significance exists in a set of given observations and that any differences are due to chance alone.

And there you have it – hypotheses in a nutshell. 

If you have any questions, be sure to leave a comment below and we’ll do our best to help you. If you need hands-on help developing and testing your hypotheses, consider our private coaching service , where we hold your hand through the research journey.

17 Comments

Very useful information. I benefit more from getting more information in this regard.

Very great insight,educative and informative. Please give meet deep critics on many research data of public international Law like human rights, environment, natural resources, law of the sea etc

In a book I read a distinction is made between null, research, and alternative hypothesis. As far as I understand, alternative and research hypotheses are the same. Can you please elaborate? Best Afshin

This is a self explanatory, easy going site. I will recommend this to my friends and colleagues.

Very good definition. How can I cite your definition in my thesis? Thank you. Is nul hypothesis compulsory in a research?

It’s a counter-proposal to be proven as a rejection

Please what is the difference between alternate hypothesis and research hypothesis?

It is a very good explanation. However, it limits hypotheses to statistically tasteable ideas. What about for qualitative researches or other researches that involve quantitative data that don’t need statistical tests?

In qualitative research, one typically uses propositions, not hypotheses.

could you please elaborate it more

I’ve benefited greatly from these notes, thank you.

This is very helpful

well articulated ideas are presented here, thank you for being reliable sources of information

Excellent. Thanks for being clear and sound about the research methodology and hypothesis (quantitative research)

I have only a simple question regarding the null hypothesis. – Is the null hypothesis (Ho) known as the reversible hypothesis of the alternative hypothesis (H1? – How to test it in academic research?

this is very important note help me much more

Hi” best wishes to you and your very nice blog” 

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

• What Is Research Methodology? Simple Definition (With Examples) - Grad Coach - […] Contrasted to this, a quantitative methodology is typically used when the research aims and objectives are confirmatory in nature. For example,…

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case AskWhy Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research

Research Hypothesis: What It Is, Types + How to Develop?

A research study starts with a question. Researchers worldwide ask questions and create research hypotheses. The effectiveness of research relies on developing a good research hypothesis. Examples of research hypotheses can guide researchers in writing effective ones.

In this blog, we’ll learn what a research hypothesis is, why it’s important in research, and the different types used in science. We’ll also guide you through creating your research hypothesis and discussing ways to test and evaluate it.

What is a Research Hypothesis?

A hypothesis is like a guess or idea that you suggest to check if it’s true. A research hypothesis is a statement that brings up a question and predicts what might happen.

It’s really important in the scientific method and is used in experiments to figure things out. Essentially, it’s an educated guess about how things are connected in the research.

A research hypothesis usually includes pointing out the independent variable (the thing they’re changing or studying) and the dependent variable (the result they’re measuring or watching). It helps plan how to gather and analyze data to see if there’s evidence to support or deny the expected connection between these variables.

Importance of Hypothesis in Research

Hypotheses are really important in research. They help design studies, allow for practical testing, and add to our scientific knowledge. Their main role is to organize research projects, making them purposeful, focused, and valuable to the scientific community. Let’s look at some key reasons why they matter:

• A research hypothesis helps test theories.

A hypothesis plays a pivotal role in the scientific method by providing a basis for testing existing theories. For example, a hypothesis might test the predictive power of a psychological theory on human behavior.

• It serves as a great platform for investigation activities.

It serves as a launching pad for investigation activities, which offers researchers a clear starting point. A research hypothesis can explore the relationship between exercise and stress reduction.

• Hypothesis guides the research work or study.

A well-formulated hypothesis guides the entire research process. It ensures that the study remains focused and purposeful. For instance, a hypothesis about the impact of social media on interpersonal relationships provides clear guidance for a study.

• Hypothesis sometimes suggests theories.

In some cases, a hypothesis can suggest new theories or modifications to existing ones. For example, a hypothesis testing the effectiveness of a new drug might prompt a reconsideration of current medical theories.

• It helps in knowing the data needs.

A hypothesis clarifies the data requirements for a study, ensuring that researchers collect the necessary information—a hypothesis guiding the collection of demographic data to analyze the influence of age on a particular phenomenon.

• The hypothesis explains social phenomena.

Hypotheses are instrumental in explaining complex social phenomena. For instance, a hypothesis might explore the relationship between economic factors and crime rates in a given community.

• Hypothesis provides a relationship between phenomena for empirical Testing.

Hypotheses establish clear relationships between phenomena, paving the way for empirical testing. An example could be a hypothesis exploring the correlation between sleep patterns and academic performance.

• It helps in knowing the most suitable analysis technique.

A hypothesis guides researchers in selecting the most appropriate analysis techniques for their data. For example, a hypothesis focusing on the effectiveness of a teaching method may lead to the choice of statistical analyses best suited for educational research.

Characteristics of a Good Research Hypothesis

A hypothesis is a specific idea that you can test in a study. It often comes from looking at past research and theories. A good hypothesis usually starts with a research question that you can explore through background research. For it to be effective, consider these key characteristics:

• Clear and Focused Language: A good hypothesis uses clear and focused language to avoid confusion and ensure everyone understands it.
• Related to the Research Topic: The hypothesis should directly relate to the research topic, acting as a bridge between the specific question and the broader study.
• Testable: An effective hypothesis can be tested, meaning its prediction can be checked with real data to support or challenge the proposed relationship.
• Potential for Exploration: A good hypothesis often comes from a research question that invites further exploration. Doing background research helps find gaps and potential areas to investigate.
• Includes Variables: The hypothesis should clearly state both the independent and dependent variables, specifying the factors being studied and the expected outcomes.
• Ethical Considerations: Check if variables can be manipulated without breaking ethical standards. It’s crucial to maintain ethical research practices.
• Predicts Outcomes: The hypothesis should predict the expected relationship and outcome, acting as a roadmap for the study and guiding data collection and analysis.
• Simple and Concise: A good hypothesis avoids unnecessary complexity and is simple and concise, expressing the essence of the proposed relationship clearly.
• Clear and Assumption-Free: The hypothesis should be clear and free from assumptions about the reader’s prior knowledge, ensuring universal understanding.
• Observable and Testable Results: A strong hypothesis implies research that produces observable and testable results, making sure the study’s outcomes can be effectively measured and analyzed.

When you use these characteristics as a checklist, it can help you create a good research hypothesis. It’ll guide improving and strengthening the hypothesis, identifying any weaknesses, and making necessary changes. Crafting a hypothesis with these features helps you conduct a thorough and insightful research study.

Types of Research Hypotheses

The research hypothesis comes in various types, each serving a specific purpose in guiding the scientific investigation. Knowing the differences will make it easier for you to create your own hypothesis. Here’s an overview of the common types:

01. Null Hypothesis

The null hypothesis states that there is no connection between two considered variables or that two groups are unrelated. As discussed earlier, a hypothesis is an unproven assumption lacking sufficient supporting data. It serves as the statement researchers aim to disprove. It is testable, verifiable, and can be rejected.

For example, if you’re studying the relationship between Project A and Project B, assuming both projects are of equal standard is your null hypothesis. It needs to be specific for your study.

02. Alternative Hypothesis

The alternative hypothesis is basically another option to the null hypothesis. It involves looking for a significant change or alternative that could lead you to reject the null hypothesis. It’s a different idea compared to the null hypothesis.

When you create a null hypothesis, you’re making an educated guess about whether something is true or if there’s a connection between that thing and another variable. If the null view suggests something is correct, the alternative hypothesis says it’s incorrect. 

For instance, if your null hypothesis is “I’m going to be $1000 richer,” the alternative hypothesis would be “I’m not going to get $1000 or be richer.”

03. Directional Hypothesis

The directional hypothesis predicts the direction of the relationship between independent and dependent variables. They specify whether the effect will be positive or negative.

If you increase your study hours, you will experience a positive association with your exam scores. This hypothesis suggests that as you increase the independent variable (study hours), there will also be an increase in the dependent variable (exam scores).

04. Non-directional Hypothesis

The non-directional hypothesis predicts the existence of a relationship between variables but does not specify the direction of the effect. It suggests that there will be a significant difference or relationship, but it does not predict the nature of that difference.

For example, you will find no notable difference in test scores between students who receive the educational intervention and those who do not. However, once you compare the test scores of the two groups, you will notice an important difference.

05. Simple Hypothesis

A simple hypothesis predicts a relationship between one dependent variable and one independent variable without specifying the nature of that relationship. It’s simple and usually used when we don’t know much about how the two things are connected.

For example, if you adopt effective study habits, you will achieve higher exam scores than those with poor study habits.

06. Complex Hypothesis

A complex hypothesis is an idea that specifies a relationship between multiple independent and dependent variables. It is a more detailed idea than a simple hypothesis.

While a simple view suggests a straightforward cause-and-effect relationship between two things, a complex hypothesis involves many factors and how they’re connected to each other.

For example, when you increase your study time, you tend to achieve higher exam scores. The connection between your study time and exam performance is affected by various factors, including the quality of your sleep, your motivation levels, and the effectiveness of your study techniques.

If you sleep well, stay highly motivated, and use effective study strategies, you may observe a more robust positive correlation between the time you spend studying and your exam scores, unlike those who may lack these factors.

07. Associative Hypothesis

An associative hypothesis proposes a connection between two things without saying that one causes the other. Basically, it suggests that when one thing changes, the other changes too, but it doesn’t claim that one thing is causing the change in the other.

For example, you will likely notice higher exam scores when you increase your study time. You can recognize an association between your study time and exam scores in this scenario.

Your hypothesis acknowledges a relationship between the two variables—your study time and exam scores—without asserting that increased study time directly causes higher exam scores. You need to consider that other factors, like motivation or learning style, could affect the observed association.

08. Causal Hypothesis

A causal hypothesis proposes a cause-and-effect relationship between two variables. It suggests that changes in one variable directly cause changes in another variable.

For example, when you increase your study time, you experience higher exam scores. This hypothesis suggests a direct cause-and-effect relationship, indicating that the more time you spend studying, the higher your exam scores. It assumes that changes in your study time directly influence changes in your exam performance.

09. Empirical Hypothesis

An empirical hypothesis is a statement based on things we can see and measure. It comes from direct observation or experiments and can be tested with real-world evidence. If an experiment proves a theory, it supports the idea and shows it’s not just a guess. This makes the statement more reliable than a wild guess.

For example, if you increase the dosage of a certain medication, you might observe a quicker recovery time for patients. Imagine you’re in charge of a clinical trial. In this trial, patients are given varying dosages of the medication, and you measure and compare their recovery times. This allows you to directly see the effects of different dosages on how fast patients recover.

This way, you can create a research hypothesis: “Increasing the dosage of a certain medication will lead to a faster recovery time for patients.”

10. Statistical Hypothesis

A statistical hypothesis is a statement or assumption about a population parameter that is the subject of an investigation. It serves as the basis for statistical analysis and testing. It is often tested using statistical methods to draw inferences about the larger population.

In a hypothesis test, statistical evidence is collected to either reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis or fail to reject the null hypothesis due to insufficient evidence.

For example, let’s say you’re testing a new medicine. Your hypothesis could be that the medicine doesn’t really help patients get better. So, you collect data and use statistics to see if your guess is right or if the medicine actually makes a difference.

If the data strongly shows that the medicine does help, you say your guess was wrong, and the medicine does make a difference. But if the proof isn’t strong enough, you can stick with your original guess because you didn’t get enough evidence to change your mind.

How to Develop a Research Hypotheses?

Step 1: identify your research problem or topic..

Define the area of interest or the problem you want to investigate. Make sure it’s clear and well-defined.

Start by asking a question about your chosen topic. Consider the limitations of your research and create a straightforward problem related to your topic. Once you’ve done that, you can develop and test a hypothesis with evidence.

Step 2: Conduct a literature review

Review existing literature related to your research problem. This will help you understand the current state of knowledge in the field, identify gaps, and build a foundation for your hypothesis. Consider the following questions:

• What existing research has been conducted on your chosen topic?
• Are there any gaps or unanswered questions in the current literature?
• How will the existing literature contribute to the foundation of your research?

Step 3: Formulate your research question

Based on your literature review, create a specific and concise research question that addresses your identified problem. Your research question should be clear, focused, and relevant to your field of study.

Step 4: Identify variables

Determine the key variables involved in your research question. Variables are the factors or phenomena that you will study and manipulate to test your hypothesis.

• Independent Variable: The variable you manipulate or control.
• Dependent Variable: The variable you measure to observe the effect of the independent variable.

Step 5: State the Null hypothesis

The null hypothesis is a statement that there is no significant difference or effect. It serves as a baseline for comparison with the alternative hypothesis.

Step 6: Select appropriate methods for testing the hypothesis

Choose research methods that align with your study objectives, such as experiments, surveys, or observational studies. The selected methods enable you to test your research hypothesis effectively.

Creating a research hypothesis usually takes more than one try. Expect to make changes as you collect data. It’s normal to test and say no to a few hypotheses before you find the right answer to your research question.

Testing and Evaluating Hypotheses

Testing hypotheses is a really important part of research. It’s like the practical side of things. Here, real-world evidence will help you determine how different things are connected. Let’s explore the main steps in hypothesis testing:

• State your research hypothesis.

Before testing, clearly articulate your research hypothesis. This involves framing both a null hypothesis, suggesting no significant effect or relationship, and an alternative hypothesis, proposing the expected outcome.

• Collect data strategically.

Plan how you will gather information in a way that fits your study. Make sure your data collection method matches the things you’re studying.

Whether through surveys, observations, or experiments, this step demands precision and adherence to the established methodology. The quality of data collected directly influences the credibility of study outcomes.

• Perform an appropriate statistical test.

Choose a statistical test that aligns with the nature of your data and the hypotheses being tested. Whether it’s a t-test, chi-square test, ANOVA, or regression analysis, selecting the right statistical tool is paramount for accurate and reliable results.

• Decide if your idea was right or wrong.

Following the statistical analysis, evaluate the results in the context of your null hypothesis. You need to decide if you should reject your null hypothesis or not.

• Share what you found.

When discussing what you found in your research, be clear and organized. Say whether your idea was supported or not, and talk about what your results mean. Also, mention any limits to your study and suggest ideas for future research.

The Role of QuestionPro to Develop a Good Research Hypothesis

QuestionPro is a survey and research platform that provides tools for creating, distributing, and analyzing surveys. It plays a crucial role in the research process, especially when you’re in the initial stages of hypothesis development. Here’s how QuestionPro can help you to develop a good research hypothesis:

• Survey design and data collection: You can use the platform to create targeted questions that help you gather relevant data.
• Exploratory research: Through surveys and feedback mechanisms on QuestionPro, you can conduct exploratory research to understand the landscape of a particular subject.
• Literature review and background research: QuestionPro surveys can collect sample population opinions, experiences, and preferences. This data and a thorough literature evaluation can help you generate a well-grounded hypothesis by improving your research knowledge.
• Identifying variables: Using targeted survey questions, you can identify relevant variables related to their research topic.
• Testing assumptions: You can use surveys to informally test certain assumptions or hypotheses before formalizing a research hypothesis.
• Data analysis tools: QuestionPro provides tools for analyzing survey data. You can use these tools to identify the collected data’s patterns, correlations, or trends.
• Refining your hypotheses: As you collect data through QuestionPro, you can adjust your hypotheses based on the real-world responses you receive.

A research hypothesis is like a guide for researchers in science. It’s a well-thought-out idea that has been thoroughly tested. This idea is crucial as researchers can explore different fields, such as medicine, social sciences, and natural sciences. The research hypothesis links theories to real-world evidence and gives researchers a clear path to explore and make discoveries.

QuestionPro Research Suite is a helpful tool for researchers. It makes creating surveys, collecting data, and analyzing information easily. It supports all kinds of research, from exploring new ideas to forming hypotheses. With a focus on using data, it helps researchers do their best work.

Are you interested in learning more about QuestionPro Research Suite? Take advantage of QuestionPro’s free trial to get an initial look at its capabilities and realize the full potential of your research efforts.

LEARN MORE         FREE TRIAL

MORE LIKE THIS

Participant Engagement: Strategies + Improving Interaction

Sep 12, 2024

Employee Recognition Programs: A Complete Guide

Sep 11, 2024

A guide to conducting agile qualitative research for rapid insights with Digsite 

Cultural Insights: What it is, Importance + How to Collect?

Sep 10, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Tuesday CX Thoughts (TCXT)
• Uncategorized
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

• Privacy Policy

Home » What is a Hypothesis – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

What is a Hypothesis – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Definition:

Hypothesis is an educated guess or proposed explanation for a phenomenon, based on some initial observations or data. It is a tentative statement that can be tested and potentially proven or disproven through further investigation and experimentation.

Hypothesis is often used in scientific research to guide the design of experiments and the collection and analysis of data. It is an essential element of the scientific method, as it allows researchers to make predictions about the outcome of their experiments and to test those predictions to determine their accuracy.

Types of Hypothesis

Types of Hypothesis are as follows:

Research Hypothesis

A research hypothesis is a statement that predicts a relationship between variables. It is usually formulated as a specific statement that can be tested through research, and it is often used in scientific research to guide the design of experiments.

Null Hypothesis

The null hypothesis is a statement that assumes there is no significant difference or relationship between variables. It is often used as a starting point for testing the research hypothesis, and if the results of the study reject the null hypothesis, it suggests that there is a significant difference or relationship between variables.

Alternative Hypothesis

An alternative hypothesis is a statement that assumes there is a significant difference or relationship between variables. It is often used as an alternative to the null hypothesis and is tested against the null hypothesis to determine which statement is more accurate.

Directional Hypothesis

A directional hypothesis is a statement that predicts the direction of the relationship between variables. For example, a researcher might predict that increasing the amount of exercise will result in a decrease in body weight.

Non-directional Hypothesis

A non-directional hypothesis is a statement that predicts the relationship between variables but does not specify the direction. For example, a researcher might predict that there is a relationship between the amount of exercise and body weight, but they do not specify whether increasing or decreasing exercise will affect body weight.

Statistical Hypothesis

A statistical hypothesis is a statement that assumes a particular statistical model or distribution for the data. It is often used in statistical analysis to test the significance of a particular result.

Composite Hypothesis

A composite hypothesis is a statement that assumes more than one condition or outcome. It can be divided into several sub-hypotheses, each of which represents a different possible outcome.

Empirical Hypothesis

An empirical hypothesis is a statement that is based on observed phenomena or data. It is often used in scientific research to develop theories or models that explain the observed phenomena.

Simple Hypothesis

A simple hypothesis is a statement that assumes only one outcome or condition. It is often used in scientific research to test a single variable or factor.

Complex Hypothesis

A complex hypothesis is a statement that assumes multiple outcomes or conditions. It is often used in scientific research to test the effects of multiple variables or factors on a particular outcome.

Applications of Hypothesis

Hypotheses are used in various fields to guide research and make predictions about the outcomes of experiments or observations. Here are some examples of how hypotheses are applied in different fields:

• Science : In scientific research, hypotheses are used to test the validity of theories and models that explain natural phenomena. For example, a hypothesis might be formulated to test the effects of a particular variable on a natural system, such as the effects of climate change on an ecosystem.
• Medicine : In medical research, hypotheses are used to test the effectiveness of treatments and therapies for specific conditions. For example, a hypothesis might be formulated to test the effects of a new drug on a particular disease.
• Psychology : In psychology, hypotheses are used to test theories and models of human behavior and cognition. For example, a hypothesis might be formulated to test the effects of a particular stimulus on the brain or behavior.
• Sociology : In sociology, hypotheses are used to test theories and models of social phenomena, such as the effects of social structures or institutions on human behavior. For example, a hypothesis might be formulated to test the effects of income inequality on crime rates.
• Business : In business research, hypotheses are used to test the validity of theories and models that explain business phenomena, such as consumer behavior or market trends. For example, a hypothesis might be formulated to test the effects of a new marketing campaign on consumer buying behavior.
• Engineering : In engineering, hypotheses are used to test the effectiveness of new technologies or designs. For example, a hypothesis might be formulated to test the efficiency of a new solar panel design.

How to write a Hypothesis

Here are the steps to follow when writing a hypothesis:

Identify the Research Question

The first step is to identify the research question that you want to answer through your study. This question should be clear, specific, and focused. It should be something that can be investigated empirically and that has some relevance or significance in the field.

Conduct a Literature Review

Before writing your hypothesis, it’s essential to conduct a thorough literature review to understand what is already known about the topic. This will help you to identify the research gap and formulate a hypothesis that builds on existing knowledge.

Determine the Variables

The next step is to identify the variables involved in the research question. A variable is any characteristic or factor that can vary or change. There are two types of variables: independent and dependent. The independent variable is the one that is manipulated or changed by the researcher, while the dependent variable is the one that is measured or observed as a result of the independent variable.

Formulate the Hypothesis

Based on the research question and the variables involved, you can now formulate your hypothesis. A hypothesis should be a clear and concise statement that predicts the relationship between the variables. It should be testable through empirical research and based on existing theory or evidence.

Write the Null Hypothesis

The null hypothesis is the opposite of the alternative hypothesis, which is the hypothesis that you are testing. The null hypothesis states that there is no significant difference or relationship between the variables. It is important to write the null hypothesis because it allows you to compare your results with what would be expected by chance.

Refine the Hypothesis

After formulating the hypothesis, it’s important to refine it and make it more precise. This may involve clarifying the variables, specifying the direction of the relationship, or making the hypothesis more testable.

Examples of Hypothesis

Here are a few examples of hypotheses in different fields:

• Psychology : “Increased exposure to violent video games leads to increased aggressive behavior in adolescents.”
• Biology : “Higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will lead to increased plant growth.”
• Sociology : “Individuals who grow up in households with higher socioeconomic status will have higher levels of education and income as adults.”
• Education : “Implementing a new teaching method will result in higher student achievement scores.”
• Marketing : “Customers who receive a personalized email will be more likely to make a purchase than those who receive a generic email.”
• Physics : “An increase in temperature will cause an increase in the volume of a gas, assuming all other variables remain constant.”
• Medicine : “Consuming a diet high in saturated fats will increase the risk of developing heart disease.”

Purpose of Hypothesis

The purpose of a hypothesis is to provide a testable explanation for an observed phenomenon or a prediction of a future outcome based on existing knowledge or theories. A hypothesis is an essential part of the scientific method and helps to guide the research process by providing a clear focus for investigation. It enables scientists to design experiments or studies to gather evidence and data that can support or refute the proposed explanation or prediction.

The formulation of a hypothesis is based on existing knowledge, observations, and theories, and it should be specific, testable, and falsifiable. A specific hypothesis helps to define the research question, which is important in the research process as it guides the selection of an appropriate research design and methodology. Testability of the hypothesis means that it can be proven or disproven through empirical data collection and analysis. Falsifiability means that the hypothesis should be formulated in such a way that it can be proven wrong if it is incorrect.

In addition to guiding the research process, the testing of hypotheses can lead to new discoveries and advancements in scientific knowledge. When a hypothesis is supported by the data, it can be used to develop new theories or models to explain the observed phenomenon. When a hypothesis is not supported by the data, it can help to refine existing theories or prompt the development of new hypotheses to explain the phenomenon.

When to use Hypothesis

Here are some common situations in which hypotheses are used:

• In scientific research , hypotheses are used to guide the design of experiments and to help researchers make predictions about the outcomes of those experiments.
• In social science research , hypotheses are used to test theories about human behavior, social relationships, and other phenomena.
• I n business , hypotheses can be used to guide decisions about marketing, product development, and other areas. For example, a hypothesis might be that a new product will sell well in a particular market, and this hypothesis can be tested through market research.

Characteristics of Hypothesis

Here are some common characteristics of a hypothesis:

• Testable : A hypothesis must be able to be tested through observation or experimentation. This means that it must be possible to collect data that will either support or refute the hypothesis.
• Falsifiable : A hypothesis must be able to be proven false if it is not supported by the data. If a hypothesis cannot be falsified, then it is not a scientific hypothesis.
• Clear and concise : A hypothesis should be stated in a clear and concise manner so that it can be easily understood and tested.
• Based on existing knowledge : A hypothesis should be based on existing knowledge and research in the field. It should not be based on personal beliefs or opinions.
• Specific : A hypothesis should be specific in terms of the variables being tested and the predicted outcome. This will help to ensure that the research is focused and well-designed.
• Tentative: A hypothesis is a tentative statement or assumption that requires further testing and evidence to be confirmed or refuted. It is not a final conclusion or assertion.
• Relevant : A hypothesis should be relevant to the research question or problem being studied. It should address a gap in knowledge or provide a new perspective on the issue.

Advantages of Hypothesis

Hypotheses have several advantages in scientific research and experimentation:

• Guides research: A hypothesis provides a clear and specific direction for research. It helps to focus the research question, select appropriate methods and variables, and interpret the results.
• Predictive powe r: A hypothesis makes predictions about the outcome of research, which can be tested through experimentation. This allows researchers to evaluate the validity of the hypothesis and make new discoveries.
• Facilitates communication: A hypothesis provides a common language and framework for scientists to communicate with one another about their research. This helps to facilitate the exchange of ideas and promotes collaboration.
• Efficient use of resources: A hypothesis helps researchers to use their time, resources, and funding efficiently by directing them towards specific research questions and methods that are most likely to yield results.
• Provides a basis for further research: A hypothesis that is supported by data provides a basis for further research and exploration. It can lead to new hypotheses, theories, and discoveries.
• Increases objectivity: A hypothesis can help to increase objectivity in research by providing a clear and specific framework for testing and interpreting results. This can reduce bias and increase the reliability of research findings.

Limitations of Hypothesis

Some Limitations of the Hypothesis are as follows:

• Limited to observable phenomena: Hypotheses are limited to observable phenomena and cannot account for unobservable or intangible factors. This means that some research questions may not be amenable to hypothesis testing.
• May be inaccurate or incomplete: Hypotheses are based on existing knowledge and research, which may be incomplete or inaccurate. This can lead to flawed hypotheses and erroneous conclusions.
• May be biased: Hypotheses may be biased by the researcher’s own beliefs, values, or assumptions. This can lead to selective interpretation of data and a lack of objectivity in research.
• Cannot prove causation: A hypothesis can only show a correlation between variables, but it cannot prove causation. This requires further experimentation and analysis.
• Limited to specific contexts: Hypotheses are limited to specific contexts and may not be generalizable to other situations or populations. This means that results may not be applicable in other contexts or may require further testing.
• May be affected by chance : Hypotheses may be affected by chance or random variation, which can obscure or distort the true relationship between variables.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Future Research – Thesis Guide

Figures in Research Paper – Examples and Guide

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Critical Analysis – Types, Examples and Writing...

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Data Verification – Process, Types and Examples

LEARN STATISTICS EASILY

Learn Data Analysis Now!

What is: Hypothesis

What is a hypothesis.

A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon, serving as a foundational element in scientific research and data analysis. It is a statement that can be tested through experimentation and observation, allowing researchers to draw conclusions based on empirical evidence. In the realm of statistics and data science, formulating a clear and testable hypothesis is crucial for guiding the research process and ensuring that the results are valid and reliable.

Ad description. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.

Types of Hypotheses

There are primarily two types of hypotheses: the null hypothesis (H0) and the alternative hypothesis (H1). The null hypothesis posits that there is no effect or no difference between groups, serving as a baseline for comparison. Conversely, the alternative hypothesis suggests that there is an effect or a difference. Understanding these two types is essential for conducting hypothesis testing, which is a core aspect of statistical analysis.

Formulating a Hypothesis

Formulating a hypothesis involves identifying a research question and making an educated guess about the expected outcome. This process typically includes reviewing existing literature, defining variables, and determining the relationship between them. A well-structured hypothesis should be specific, measurable, and falsifiable, enabling researchers to design experiments that can effectively test the proposed statement.

Importance of Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a statistical method that allows researchers to determine the validity of their hypotheses. By using statistical tests, researchers can analyze data to either reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis. This process is vital for drawing conclusions about the population from which the sample was drawn, and it helps to minimize the risk of making incorrect inferences based on sample data.

Common Statistical Tests for Hypothesis Testing

Several statistical tests are commonly used for hypothesis testing, including t-tests, chi-square tests, and ANOVA. Each test has its specific applications and assumptions, making it essential for researchers to choose the appropriate test based on their data and research design. Understanding these tests is crucial for accurately interpreting the results of hypothesis tests and making informed decisions based on statistical evidence.

Role of P-Values in Hypothesis Testing

P-values play a significant role in hypothesis testing, providing a measure of the strength of evidence against the null hypothesis. A low p-value indicates strong evidence against H0, leading researchers to reject it in favor of the alternative hypothesis. Conversely, a high p-value suggests insufficient evidence to reject H0. Researchers must carefully consider the p-value in the context of their study, as it can influence the conclusions drawn from the data.

Limitations of Hypotheses

While hypotheses are essential for guiding research, they also have limitations. A hypothesis is only as good as the data and methods used to test it. Poorly formulated hypotheses can lead to misleading results, and researchers must be cautious about overgeneralizing findings. Additionally, the reliance on statistical significance can sometimes overshadow the practical significance of results, leading to misinterpretations of the data.

Hypothesis in Data Science

In data science, hypotheses play a critical role in exploratory data analysis and predictive modeling. Data scientists often formulate hypotheses to guide their analyses, helping them to identify patterns and relationships within the data. By testing these hypotheses, data scientists can refine their models and improve their predictions, ultimately leading to more accurate insights and decision-making.

Conclusion on Hypothesis in Research

In summary, a hypothesis is a fundamental component of scientific research, providing a framework for investigation and analysis. Understanding the types, formulation, and testing of hypotheses is crucial for researchers in statistics, data analysis, and data science. By adhering to rigorous scientific principles, researchers can ensure that their findings are robust, reliable, and contribute meaningfully to the body of knowledge in their respective fields.

The Research Hypothesis: Role and Construction

• First Online: 01 January 2012

Cite this chapter

• Phyllis G. Supino EdD 3  

6127 Accesses

A hypothesis is a logical construct, interposed between a problem and its solution, which represents a proposed answer to a research question. It gives direction to the investigator’s thinking about the problem and, therefore, facilitates a solution. There are three primary modes of inference by which hypotheses are developed: deduction (reasoning from a general propositions to specific instances), induction (reasoning from specific instances to a general proposition), and abduction (formulation/acceptance on probation of a hypothesis to explain a surprising observation).

A research hypothesis should reflect an inference about variables; be stated as a grammatically complete, declarative sentence; be expressed simply and unambiguously; provide an adequate answer to the research problem; and be testable. Hypotheses can be classified as conceptual versus operational, single versus bi- or multivariable, causal or not causal, mechanistic versus nonmechanistic, and null or alternative. Hypotheses most commonly entail statements about “variables” which, in turn, can be classified according to their level of measurement (scaling characteristics) or according to their role in the hypothesis (independent, dependent, moderator, control, or intervening).

A hypothesis is rendered operational when its broadly (conceptually) stated variables are replaced by operational definitions of those variables. Hypotheses stated in this manner are called operational hypotheses, specific hypotheses, or predictions and facilitate testing.

Wrong hypotheses, rightly worked from, have produced more results than unguided observation

—Augustus De Morgan, 1872[ 1 ]—

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The Nature and Logic of Science: Testing Hypotheses

Abductive Research Methods in Psychological Science

Abductive Research Methods in Psychological Science

De Morgan A, De Morgan S. A budget of paradoxes. London: Longmans Green; 1872.

Google Scholar  

Leedy Paul D. Practical research. Planning and design. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan; 1960.

Bernard C. Introduction to the study of experimental medicine. New York: Dover; 1957.

Erren TC. The quest for questions—on the logical force of science. Med Hypotheses. 2004;62:635–40.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Peirce CS. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vol. 7. In: Hartshorne C, Weiss P, editors. Boston: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 1966.

Aristotle. The complete works of Aristotle: the revised Oxford Translation. In: Barnes J, editor. vol. 2. Princeton/New Jersey: Princeton University Press; 1984.

Polit D, Beck CT. Conceptualizing a study to generate evidence for nursing. In: Polit D, Beck CT, editors. Nursing research: generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008. Chapter 4.

Jenicek M, Hitchcock DL. Evidence-based practice. Logic and critical thinking in medicine. Chicago: AMA Press; 2005.

Bacon F. The novum organon or a true guide to the interpretation of nature. A new translation by the Rev G.W. Kitchin. Oxford: The University Press; 1855.

Popper KR. Objective knowledge: an evolutionary approach (revised edition). New York: Oxford University Press; 1979.

Morgan AJ, Parker S. Translational mini-review series on vaccines: the Edward Jenner Museum and the history of vaccination. Clin Exp Immunol. 2007;147:389–94.

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Pead PJ. Benjamin Jesty: new light in the dawn of vaccination. Lancet. 2003;362:2104–9.

Lee JA. The scientific endeavor: a primer on scientific principles and practice. San Francisco: Addison-Wesley Longman; 2000.

Allchin D. Lawson’s shoehorn, or should the philosophy of science be rated, ‘X’? Science and Education. 2003;12:315–29.

Article   Google Scholar  

Lawson AE. What is the role of induction and deduction in reasoning and scientific inquiry? J Res Sci Teach. 2005;42:716–40.

Peirce CS. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vol. 2. In: Hartshorne C, Weiss P, editors. Boston: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 1965.

Bonfantini MA, Proni G. To guess or not to guess? In: Eco U, Sebeok T, editors. The sign of three: Dupin, Holmes, Peirce. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 1983. Chapter 5.

Peirce CS. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vol. 5. In: Hartshorne C, Weiss P, editors. Boston: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 1965.

Flach PA, Kakas AC. Abductive and inductive reasoning: background issues. In: Flach PA, Kakas AC, ­editors. Abduction and induction. Essays on their relation and integration. The Netherlands: Klewer; 2000. Chapter 1.

Murray JF. Voltaire, Walpole and Pasteur: variations on the theme of discovery. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;172:423–6.

Danemark B, Ekstrom M, Jakobsen L, Karlsson JC. Methodological implications, generalization, scientific inference, models (Part II) In: explaining society. Critical realism in the social sciences. New York: Routledge; 2002.

Pasteur L. Inaugural lecture as professor and dean of the faculty of sciences. In: Peterson H, editor. A treasury of the world’s greatest speeches. Douai, France: University of Lille 7 Dec 1954.

Swineburne R. Simplicity as evidence for truth. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press; 1997.

Sakar S, editor. Logical empiricism at its peak: Schlick, Carnap and Neurath. New York: Garland; 1996.

Popper K. The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Basic Books; 1959. 1934, trans. 1959.

Caws P. The philosophy of science. Princeton: D. Van Nostrand Company; 1965.

Popper K. Conjectures and refutations. The growth of scientific knowledge. 4th ed. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul; 1972.

Feyerabend PK. Against method, outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. London, UK: Verso; 1978.

Smith PG. Popper: conjectures and refutations (Chapter IV). In: Theory and reality: an introduction to the philosophy of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2003.

Blystone RV, Blodgett K. WWW: the scientific method. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2006;5:7–11.

Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Morgenstern H. Epidemiological research. Principles and quantitative methods. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1982.

Fortune AE, Reid WJ. Research in social work. 3rd ed. New York: Columbia University Press; 1999.

Kerlinger FN. Foundations of behavioral research. 1st ed. New York: Hold, Reinhart and Winston; 1970.

Hoskins CN, Mariano C. Research in nursing and health. Understanding and using quantitative and qualitative methods. New York: Springer; 2004.

Tuckman BW. Conducting educational research. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich; 1972.

Wang C, Chiari PC, Weihrauch D, Krolikowski JG, Warltier DC, Kersten JR, Pratt Jr PF, Pagel PS. Gender-specificity of delayed preconditioning by isoflurane in rabbits: potential role of endothelial nitric oxide synthase. Anesth Analg. 2006;103:274–80.

Beyer ME, Slesak G, Nerz S, Kazmaier S, Hoffmeister HM. Effects of endothelin-1 and IRL 1620 on myocardial contractility and myocardial energy metabolism. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1995;26(Suppl 3):S150–2.

PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Stone J, Sharpe M. Amnesia for childhood in patients with unexplained neurological symptoms. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;72:416–7.

Naughton BJ, Moran M, Ghaly Y, Michalakes C. Computer tomography scanning and delirium in elder patients. Acad Emerg Med. 1997;4:1107–10.

Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet. 1991;337:867–72.

Stern JM, Simes RJ. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ. 1997;315:640–5.

Stevens SS. On the theory of scales and measurement. Science. 1946;103:677–80.

Knapp TR. Treating ordinal scales as interval scales: an attempt to resolve the controversy. Nurs Res. 1990;39:121–3.

The Cochrane Collaboration. Open Learning Material. www.cochrane-net.org/openlearning/html/mod14-3.htm . Accessed 12 Oct 2009.

MacCorquodale K, Meehl PE. On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening ­variables. Psychol Rev. 1948;55:95–107.

Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: ­conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51:1173–82.

Williamson GM, Schultz R. Activity restriction mediates the association between pain and depressed affect: a study of younger and older adult cancer patients. Psychol Aging. 1995;10:369–78.

Song M, Lee EO. Development of a functional capacity model for the elderly. Res Nurs Health. 1998;21:189–98.

MacKinnon DP. Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York: Routledge; 2008.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, 450 Clarkson Avenue, 1199, Brooklyn, NY, 11203, USA

Phyllis G. Supino EdD

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Phyllis G. Supino EdD .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

, Cardiovascular Medicine, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Clarkson Avenue, box 1199 450, Brooklyn, 11203, USA

Phyllis G. Supino

, Cardiovascualr Medicine, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Clarkson Avenue 450, Brooklyn, 11203, USA

Jeffrey S. Borer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Supino, P.G. (2012). The Research Hypothesis: Role and Construction. In: Supino, P., Borer, J. (eds) Principles of Research Methodology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3360-6_3

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3360-6_3

Published : 18 April 2012

Publisher Name : Springer, New York, NY

Print ISBN : 978-1-4614-3359-0

Online ISBN : 978-1-4614-3360-6

eBook Packages : Medicine Medicine (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Research Hypothesis In Psychology: Types, & Examples

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

A research hypothesis, in its plural form “hypotheses,” is a specific, testable prediction about the anticipated results of a study, established at its outset. It is a key component of the scientific method .

Hypotheses connect theory to data and guide the research process towards expanding scientific understanding

Some key points about hypotheses:

• A hypothesis expresses an expected pattern or relationship. It connects the variables under investigation.
• It is stated in clear, precise terms before any data collection or analysis occurs. This makes the hypothesis testable.
• A hypothesis must be falsifiable. It should be possible, even if unlikely in practice, to collect data that disconfirms rather than supports the hypothesis.
• Hypotheses guide research. Scientists design studies to explicitly evaluate hypotheses about how nature works.
• For a hypothesis to be valid, it must be testable against empirical evidence. The evidence can then confirm or disprove the testable predictions.
• Hypotheses are informed by background knowledge and observation, but go beyond what is already known to propose an explanation of how or why something occurs.

Predictions typically arise from a thorough knowledge of the research literature, curiosity about real-world problems or implications, and integrating this to advance theory. They build on existing literature while providing new insight.

Types of Research Hypotheses

Alternative hypothesis.

The research hypothesis is often called the alternative or experimental hypothesis in experimental research.

It typically suggests a potential relationship between two key variables: the independent variable, which the researcher manipulates, and the dependent variable, which is measured based on those changes.

The alternative hypothesis states a relationship exists between the two variables being studied (one variable affects the other).

A hypothesis is a testable statement or prediction about the relationship between two or more variables. It is a key component of the scientific method. Some key points about hypotheses:

• Important hypotheses lead to predictions that can be tested empirically. The evidence can then confirm or disprove the testable predictions.

In summary, a hypothesis is a precise, testable statement of what researchers expect to happen in a study and why. Hypotheses connect theory to data and guide the research process towards expanding scientific understanding.

An experimental hypothesis predicts what change(s) will occur in the dependent variable when the independent variable is manipulated.

It states that the results are not due to chance and are significant in supporting the theory being investigated.

The alternative hypothesis can be directional, indicating a specific direction of the effect, or non-directional, suggesting a difference without specifying its nature. It’s what researchers aim to support or demonstrate through their study.

Null Hypothesis

The null hypothesis states no relationship exists between the two variables being studied (one variable does not affect the other). There will be no changes in the dependent variable due to manipulating the independent variable.

It states results are due to chance and are not significant in supporting the idea being investigated.

The null hypothesis, positing no effect or relationship, is a foundational contrast to the research hypothesis in scientific inquiry. It establishes a baseline for statistical testing, promoting objectivity by initiating research from a neutral stance.

Many statistical methods are tailored to test the null hypothesis, determining the likelihood of observed results if no true effect exists.

This dual-hypothesis approach provides clarity, ensuring that research intentions are explicit, and fosters consistency across scientific studies, enhancing the standardization and interpretability of research outcomes.

Nondirectional Hypothesis

A non-directional hypothesis, also known as a two-tailed hypothesis, predicts that there is a difference or relationship between two variables but does not specify the direction of this relationship.

It merely indicates that a change or effect will occur without predicting which group will have higher or lower values.

For example, “There is a difference in performance between Group A and Group B” is a non-directional hypothesis.

Directional Hypothesis

A directional (one-tailed) hypothesis predicts the nature of the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable. It predicts in which direction the change will take place. (i.e., greater, smaller, less, more)

It specifies whether one variable is greater, lesser, or different from another, rather than just indicating that there’s a difference without specifying its nature.

For example, “Exercise increases weight loss” is a directional hypothesis.

Falsifiability

The Falsification Principle, proposed by Karl Popper , is a way of demarcating science from non-science. It suggests that for a theory or hypothesis to be considered scientific, it must be testable and irrefutable.

Falsifiability emphasizes that scientific claims shouldn’t just be confirmable but should also have the potential to be proven wrong.

It means that there should exist some potential evidence or experiment that could prove the proposition false.

However many confirming instances exist for a theory, it only takes one counter observation to falsify it. For example, the hypothesis that “all swans are white,” can be falsified by observing a black swan.

For Popper, science should attempt to disprove a theory rather than attempt to continually provide evidence to support a research hypothesis.

Can a Hypothesis be Proven?

Hypotheses make probabilistic predictions. They state the expected outcome if a particular relationship exists. However, a study result supporting a hypothesis does not definitively prove it is true.

All studies have limitations. There may be unknown confounding factors or issues that limit the certainty of conclusions. Additional studies may yield different results.

In science, hypotheses can realistically only be supported with some degree of confidence, not proven. The process of science is to incrementally accumulate evidence for and against hypothesized relationships in an ongoing pursuit of better models and explanations that best fit the empirical data. But hypotheses remain open to revision and rejection if that is where the evidence leads.

• Disproving a hypothesis is definitive. Solid disconfirmatory evidence will falsify a hypothesis and require altering or discarding it based on the evidence.
• However, confirming evidence is always open to revision. Other explanations may account for the same results, and additional or contradictory evidence may emerge over time.

We can never 100% prove the alternative hypothesis. Instead, we see if we can disprove, or reject the null hypothesis.

If we reject the null hypothesis, this doesn’t mean that our alternative hypothesis is correct but does support the alternative/experimental hypothesis.

Upon analysis of the results, an alternative hypothesis can be rejected or supported, but it can never be proven to be correct. We must avoid any reference to results proving a theory as this implies 100% certainty, and there is always a chance that evidence may exist which could refute a theory.

How to Write a Hypothesis

• Identify variables . The researcher manipulates the independent variable and the dependent variable is the measured outcome.
• Operationalized the variables being investigated . Operationalization of a hypothesis refers to the process of making the variables physically measurable or testable, e.g. if you are about to study aggression, you might count the number of punches given by participants.
• Decide on a direction for your prediction . If there is evidence in the literature to support a specific effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable, write a directional (one-tailed) hypothesis. If there are limited or ambiguous findings in the literature regarding the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable, write a non-directional (two-tailed) hypothesis.
• Make it Testable : Ensure your hypothesis can be tested through experimentation or observation. It should be possible to prove it false (principle of falsifiability).
• Clear & concise language . A strong hypothesis is concise (typically one to two sentences long), and formulated using clear and straightforward language, ensuring it’s easily understood and testable.

Consider a hypothesis many teachers might subscribe to: students work better on Monday morning than on Friday afternoon (IV=Day, DV= Standard of work).

Now, if we decide to study this by giving the same group of students a lesson on a Monday morning and a Friday afternoon and then measuring their immediate recall of the material covered in each session, we would end up with the following:

• The alternative hypothesis states that students will recall significantly more information on a Monday morning than on a Friday afternoon.
• The null hypothesis states that there will be no significant difference in the amount recalled on a Monday morning compared to a Friday afternoon. Any difference will be due to chance or confounding factors.

More Examples

• Memory : Participants exposed to classical music during study sessions will recall more items from a list than those who studied in silence.
• Social Psychology : Individuals who frequently engage in social media use will report higher levels of perceived social isolation compared to those who use it infrequently.
• Developmental Psychology : Children who engage in regular imaginative play have better problem-solving skills than those who don’t.
• Clinical Psychology : Cognitive-behavioral therapy will be more effective in reducing symptoms of anxiety over a 6-month period compared to traditional talk therapy.
• Cognitive Psychology : Individuals who multitask between various electronic devices will have shorter attention spans on focused tasks than those who single-task.
• Health Psychology : Patients who practice mindfulness meditation will experience lower levels of chronic pain compared to those who don’t meditate.
• Organizational Psychology : Employees in open-plan offices will report higher levels of stress than those in private offices.
• Behavioral Psychology : Rats rewarded with food after pressing a lever will press it more frequently than rats who receive no reward.

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

Step-by-Step Guide: How to Craft a Strong Research Hypothesis

• 4 minute read
• 374.4K views

Table of Contents

A research hypothesis is a concise statement about the expected result of an experiment or project. In many ways, a research hypothesis represents the starting point for a scientific endeavor, as it establishes a tentative assumption that is eventually substantiated or falsified, ultimately improving our certainty about the subject investigated.   

To help you with this and ease the process, in this article, we discuss the purpose of research hypotheses and list the most essential qualities of a compelling hypothesis. Let’s find out!  

How to Craft a Research Hypothesis  

Crafting a research hypothesis begins with a comprehensive literature review to identify a knowledge gap in your field. Once you find a question or problem, come up with a possible answer or explanation, which becomes your hypothesis. Now think about the specific methods of experimentation that can prove or disprove the hypothesis, which ultimately lead to the results of the study.   

Enlisted below are some standard formats in which you can formulate a hypothesis¹ :  

• A hypothesis can use the if/then format when it seeks to explore the correlation between two variables in a study primarily.  

Example: If administered drug X, then patients will experience reduced fatigue from cancer treatment.  

• A hypothesis can adopt when X/then Y format when it primarily aims to expose a connection between two variables  

Example: When workers spend a significant portion of their waking hours in sedentary work , then they experience a greater frequency of digestive problems.  

• A hypothesis can also take the form of a direct statement.  

Example: Drug X and drug Y reduce the risk of cognitive decline through the same chemical pathways  

What are the Features of an Effective Hypothesis?  

Hypotheses in research need to satisfy specific criteria to be considered scientifically rigorous. Here are the most notable qualities of a strong hypothesis:  

• Testability: Ensure the hypothesis allows you to work towards observable and testable results.  
• Brevity and objectivity: Present your hypothesis as a brief statement and avoid wordiness.  
• Clarity and Relevance: The hypothesis should reflect a clear idea of what we know and what we expect to find out about a phenomenon and address the significant knowledge gap relevant to a field of study.   

Understanding Null and Alternative Hypotheses in Research  

There are two types of hypotheses used commonly in research that aid statistical analyses. These are known as the null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis . A null hypothesis is a statement assumed to be factual in the initial phase of the study.   

For example, if a researcher is testing the efficacy of a new drug, then the null hypothesis will posit that the drug has no benefits compared to an inactive control or placebo . Suppose the data collected through a drug trial leads a researcher to reject the null hypothesis. In that case, it is considered to substantiate the alternative hypothesis in the above example, that the new drug provides benefits compared to the placebo.  

Let’s take a closer look at the null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis with two more examples:  

Null Hypothesis:  

The rate of decline in the number of species in habitat X in the last year is the same as in the last 100 years when controlled for all factors except the recent wildfires.  

In the next experiment, the researcher will experimentally reject this null hypothesis in order to confirm the following alternative hypothesis :  

The rate of decline in the number of species in habitat X in the last year is different from the rate of decline in the last 100 years when controlled for all factors other than the recent wildfires.  

In the pair of null and alternative hypotheses stated above, a statistical comparison of the rate of species decline over a century and the preceding year will help the research experimentally test the null hypothesis, helping to draw scientifically valid conclusions about two factors—wildfires and species decline.   

We also recommend that researchers pay attention to contextual echoes and connections when writing research hypotheses. Research hypotheses are often closely linked to the introduction ² , such as the context of the study, and can similarly influence the reader’s judgment of the relevance and validity of the research hypothesis.  

Seasoned experts, such as professionals at Elsevier Language Services, guide authors on how to best embed a hypothesis within an article so that it communicates relevance and credibility. Contact us if you want help in ensuring readers find your hypothesis robust and unbiased.  

References  

• Hypotheses – The University Writing Center. (n.d.). https://writingcenter.tamu.edu/writing-speaking-guides/hypotheses  
• Shaping the research question and hypothesis. (n.d.). Students. https://students.unimelb.edu.au/academic-skills/graduate-research-services/writing-thesis-sections-part-2/shaping-the-research-question-and-hypothesis  

Systematic Literature Review or Literature Review?

How to Write an Effective Problem Statement for Your Research Paper

You may also like.

Submission 101: What format should be used for academic papers?

Page-Turner Articles are More Than Just Good Arguments: Be Mindful of Tone and Structure!

A Must-see for Researchers! How to Ensure Inclusivity in Your Scientific Writing

Make Hook, Line, and Sinker: The Art of Crafting Engaging Introductions

Can Describing Study Limitations Improve the Quality of Your Paper?

A Guide to Crafting Shorter, Impactful Sentences in Academic Writing

6 Steps to Write an Excellent Discussion in Your Manuscript

How to Write Clear and Crisp Civil Engineering Papers? Here are 5 Key Tips to Consider

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

An Easy Introduction to Statistical Significance (With Examples)

Published on January 7, 2021 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on June 22, 2023.

If a result is statistically significant , that means it’s unlikely to be explained solely by chance or random factors. In other words, a statistically significant result has a very low chance of occurring if there were no true effect in a research study.

The p value , or probability value, tells you the statistical significance of a finding. In most studies, a p value of 0.05 or less is considered statistically significant, but this threshold can also be set higher or lower.

Table of contents

How do you test for statistical significance, what is a significance level, problems with relying on statistical significance, other types of significance in research, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about statistical significance.

In quantitative research , data are analyzed through null hypothesis significance testing, or hypothesis testing. This is a formal procedure for assessing whether a relationship between variables or a difference between groups is statistically significant.

Null and alternative hypotheses

To begin, research predictions are rephrased into two main hypotheses: the null and alternative hypothesis .

• A null hypothesis ( H 0 ) always predicts no true effect, no relationship between variables , or no difference between groups.
• An alternative hypothesis ( H a or H 1 ) states your main prediction of a true effect, a relationship between variables, or a difference between groups.

Hypothesis testin g always starts with the assumption that the null hypothesis is true. Using this procedure, you can assess the likelihood (probability) of obtaining your results under this assumption. Based on the outcome of the test, you can reject or retain the null hypothesis.

• H 0 : There is no difference in happiness between actively smiling and not smiling.
• H a : Actively smiling leads to more happiness than not smiling.

Test statistics and p values

Every statistical test produces:

• A test statistic that indicates how closely your data match the null hypothesis.
• A corresponding p value that tells you the probability of obtaining this result if the null hypothesis is true.

The p value determines statistical significance. An extremely low p value indicates high statistical significance, while a high p value means low or no statistical significance.

Next, you perform a t test to see whether actively smiling leads to more happiness. Using the difference in average happiness between the two groups, you calculate:

• a t value (the test statistic) that tells you how much the sample data differs from the null hypothesis,
• a p value showing the likelihood of finding this result if the null hypothesis is true.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

The significance level , or alpha (α), is a value that the researcher sets in advance as the threshold for statistical significance. It is the maximum risk of making a false positive conclusion ( Type I error ) that you are willing to accept .

In a hypothesis test, the  p value is compared to the significance level to decide whether to reject the null hypothesis.

• If the p value is  higher than the significance level, the null hypothesis is not refuted, and the results are not statistically significant .
• If the p value is lower than the significance level, the results are interpreted as refuting the null hypothesis and reported as statistically significant .

Usually, the significance level is set to 0.05 or 5%. That means your results must have a 5% or lower chance of occurring under the null hypothesis to be considered statistically significant.

The significance level can be lowered for a more conservative test. That means an effect has to be larger to be considered statistically significant.

The significance level may also be set higher for significance testing in non-academic marketing or business contexts. This makes the study less rigorous and increases the probability of finding a statistically significant result.

As best practice, you should set a significance level before you begin your study. Otherwise, you can easily manipulate your results to match your research predictions.

It’s important to note that hypothesis testing can only show you whether or not to reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis. It can never “prove” the null hypothesis, because the lack of a statistically significant effect doesn’t mean that absolutely no effect exists.

When reporting statistical significance, include relevant descriptive statistics about your data (e.g., means and standard deviations ) as well as the test statistic and p value.

There are various critiques of the concept of statistical significance and how it is used in research.

Researchers classify results as statistically significant or non-significant using a conventional threshold that lacks any theoretical or practical basis. This means that even a tiny 0.001 decrease in a p value can convert a research finding from statistically non-significant to significant with almost no real change in the effect.

On its own, statistical significance may also be misleading because it’s affected by sample size. In extremely large samples , you’re more likely to obtain statistically significant results, even if the effect is actually small or negligible in the real world. This means that small effects are often exaggerated if they meet the significance threshold, while interesting results are ignored when they fall short of meeting the threshold.

The strong emphasis on statistical significance has led to a serious publication bias and replication crisis in the social sciences and medicine over the last few decades. Results are usually only published in academic journals if they show statistically significant results—but statistically significant results often can’t be reproduced in high quality replication studies.

As a result, many scientists call for retiring statistical significance as a decision-making tool in favor of more nuanced approaches to interpreting results.

That’s why APA guidelines advise reporting not only p values but also  effect sizes and confidence intervals wherever possible to show the real world implications of a research outcome.

Aside from statistical significance, clinical significance and practical significance are also important research outcomes.

Practical significance shows you whether the research outcome is important enough to be meaningful in the real world. It’s indicated by the effect size of the study.

Clinical significance is relevant for intervention and treatment studies. A treatment is considered clinically significant when it tangibly or substantially improves the lives of patients.

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

• Normal distribution
• Descriptive statistics
• Measures of central tendency
• Correlation coefficient

Methodology

• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Types of interviews
• Cohort study
• Thematic analysis

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Survivorship bias
• Availability heuristic
• Nonresponse bias
• Regression to the mean

Statistical significance is a term used by researchers to state that it is unlikely their observations could have occurred under the null hypothesis of a statistical test . Significance is usually denoted by a p -value , or probability value.

Statistical significance is arbitrary – it depends on the threshold, or alpha value, chosen by the researcher. The most common threshold is p < 0.05, which means that the data is likely to occur less than 5% of the time under the null hypothesis .

When the p -value falls below the chosen alpha value, then we say the result of the test is statistically significant.

A p -value , or probability value, is a number describing how likely it is that your data would have occurred under the null hypothesis of your statistical test .

P -values are usually automatically calculated by the program you use to perform your statistical test. They can also be estimated using p -value tables for the relevant test statistic .

P -values are calculated from the null distribution of the test statistic. They tell you how often a test statistic is expected to occur under the null hypothesis of the statistical test, based on where it falls in the null distribution.

If the test statistic is far from the mean of the null distribution, then the p -value will be small, showing that the test statistic is not likely to have occurred under the null hypothesis.

No. The p -value only tells you how likely the data you have observed is to have occurred under the null hypothesis .

If the p -value is below your threshold of significance (typically p < 0.05), then you can reject the null hypothesis, but this does not necessarily mean that your alternative hypothesis is true.

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.

Bhandari, P. (2023, June 22). An Easy Introduction to Statistical Significance (With Examples). Scribbr. Retrieved September 9, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/statistical-significance/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, understanding p values | definition and examples, what is effect size and why does it matter (examples), hypothesis testing | a step-by-step guide with easy examples, what is your plagiarism score.

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

The influence of enjoyment, boredom, and burnout on EFL achievement: Based on latent moderated structural equation modeling

Roles Data curation, Methodology, Writing – original draft

Affiliation School of English Studies, Shanghai International Studies University, Shanghai, China

Roles Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

• Maojie Zhou, 
• Xuemei Wang

• Published: September 12, 2024
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310281
• Reader Comments

In recent years, the boom in the field of positive psychology in second language acquisition research has seen an increasing number of scholars focusing on the individual well-being of second language learners alongside their learning effectiveness. Despite this growing interest, there is a need to further investigate the specific emotional factors influencing academic achievement in foreign language learning. This study investigates the impact of three emotions—enjoyment, boredom, and burnout—on academic achievement, and the moderating role of academic buoyancy. Data were collected from 563 college English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) students from China’s mainland using latent moderated structural equation modeling with Mplus. The results of the latent bivariate correlation analysis showed significant correlations between EFL learning emotions, academic buoyancy, and test performance. In the latent moderated structural equations model, enjoyment and burnout predicted test performance. Moreover, academic buoyancy moderated the relationships between enjoyment and test performance, and between burnout and test performance. EFL test performance was highest when enjoyment and buoyancy were both high, or when burnout and buoyancy were both low. These findings highlight the importance of fostering positive emotions and resilience in language learners to enhance their academic performance, offering valuable insights for educators and policymakers aiming to improve foreign language education.

Citation: Zhou M, Wang X (2024) The influence of enjoyment, boredom, and burnout on EFL achievement: Based on latent moderated structural equation modeling. PLoS ONE 19(9): e0310281. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310281

Editor: Ali Derakhshan, Golestan University, ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN

Received: May 9, 2024; Accepted: August 27, 2024; Published: September 12, 2024

Copyright: © 2024 Zhou, Wang. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files.

Funding: This study was supported by National Social Science Research Fund (grant number 21BYY023), and Shanghai International Studies University Peak Discipline Construction Project (grant number 41004525/001). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Historically, emotions in the field of second language acquisition (SLA) were overlooked until the 1980s, when the affective filter hypothesis prompted scholars to acknowledge their role, primarily focusing on anxiety [ 1 , 2 ]. In recent years, the field of SLA has witnessed a significant development in research on positive psychology (PP), with an increasing number of scholars adopting a whole-person perspective on SL learners, that is, focusing on both their learning effectiveness and individual well-being [ 2 ]. And in endorsing the negative aspects, it calls attention to human strengths, virtues, and positive qualities [ 3 ]. Accordingly, the SLA emotions observed by researchers are not limited to anxiety but also include enjoyment, shame, and boredom [ 4 , 5 ], further broadening the range of topics in SLA emotion research.

In China, as a compulsory public course for non-English majors, college English plays an important role in cultivating the foreign language (FL) talents needed for national development, dovetailing with the new requirements for FL proficiency in the national development strategy and the country’s strategy of Chinese Culture Going Global . However, for a long time, English teaching at universities in China has been facing the problem of being test-oriented [ 6 , 7 ]. The undergraduates’ inclination to expedite English test clearance impacts college English instruction. Enhancing language application skills is the course objective, and properly guiding students to treat English test sensibly and take college English courses seriously is the basis of and an effective way to passing the exams.

Emotions have been found to be critical to students’ EFL learning processes and achievement [ 8 , 9 ]. Recent years have witnessed a burgeoning interest in exploring the combined effects of multiple emotions on EFL learning and academic achievement, such as anxiety, enjoyment, and boredom [ 10 – 12 ], these emotions are limited in comparison to the breadth of emotions students may encounter during EFL learning. In particular, there is unexpected scarce attention to burnout in relation to FL learning [ 13 ]. Meanwhile, the available research is scarce and seldom goes beyond looking into relationships between pairs of seemingly contrastive emotions [ 12 ]. This underscores the importance of incorporating additional dimensions, such as burnout, to comprehensively investigate their cumulative impact on learning outcomes. Additionally, while previous research has highlighted the role of emotions in EFL learning, it has not adequately addressed how students’ positive attributes, particularly academic buoyancy—an important variable in positive psychology—interact with these emotions to influence FL learning outcomes [ 14 ]. Therefore, this study aims to address the aforementioned gap by examining the moderating role of academic buoyancy in the relationship between enjoyment, boredom, burnout, and foreign language academic achievement, thus further enriching the existing literature.

Theoretical analysis and hypothesis

Emotions and sla: a positive psychology perspective.

Schools have traditionally focused on students’ cognitive development without considering how emotions regulate learners’ psychological states and affect their academic performance [ 15 ]. Although the emotion filter hypothesis has led SLA scholars to recognize the importance of emotions in SL learning, the traditional psychological perspective on SL learners’ emotions has focused too much on negative emotions, such as anxiety. In the early 21st century, as PP has become a worldwide craze in many fields, it has also driven the affective turn in SLA research [ 1 , 16 ]. Scholars not only distinguish various types of emotions from psychological and physiological perspectives but also highlight the functionality of emotions. Specifically, they tap into the positive traits of individuals to compensate for deficits. Additionally, they explore the positive significance of negative emotions in SL learning, attempting to strike a balance between learners’ strengths and deficits [ 17 ].

Most studies on emotions from a PP perspective are based on broaden-and-build theory and control value theory [ 17 , 18 ]. These theories highlight the polarity of positive and negative emotions and emphasize the important role of positive emotions in well-being and academic performance [ 2 ]. Broaden-and-build theory is one of the founding theories of PP and is the theoretical underpinning of SL emotion research. Based on this theory, MacIntyre and Gregersen [ 19 ] pointed out that the coexistence of positive and negative emotions is a day-to-day emotional mechanism for language learners. Positive emotions help to develop language learners’ thinking and vision, improve their ability to focus on new things, and motivate them to absorb and construct language resources, whereas negative emotions, such as anxiety, can limit their thought–action resources.

In addition to broaden-and-build theory, control-value theory [ 18 ], introduced from the field of educational psychology, has played an important theoretical guiding role in the development of PP in the field of SLA [ 20 – 23 ]. This theory focuses on emotion in an academic context and proposes that academic emotions are awakened by the learning process or learning performance [ 24 ], including three dimensions: object focus, valence, and activation: 1) object focus classifies emotions into activity emotions (e.g., boredom and enjoyment) and outcome emotions (e.g., anxiety and sadness); 2) valence categorizes emotions into positive emotions (e.g., enjoyment) and negative emotions (e.g., boredom); and 3) activation groups emotions into high-arousal emotions (e.g., enjoyment and anxiety) and low-arousal emotions (e.g., boredom and depression). The theory also systematically explains the antecedents and consequences of emotions; that is, an individual’s assessment of the controllability and value of academic achievement-related activities or outcomes is the antecedent of academic emotions, which, in turn, has direct and indirect effects on academic activities and achievement.

Relationships between foreign learning emotions and FL achievement

Foreign language enjoyment..

In PP, foreign language enjoyment (FLE) is one of the most prevalent positive emotional experiences for learners during FL learning [ 22 ]. According to broaden-and-build theory [ 17 ], positive emotions, such as FLE, are crucial in the process of SLA. Enjoyment can facilitate the building of resources in language learning with its positive power to broaden individuals’ perspectives and enable them to absorb more in learning language [ 19 ]. As defined by Dewaele and MacIntyre [ 25 , 26 ], FLE is the positive emotion felt by learners after overcoming learning difficulties, completing academic tasks, and achieving psychological needs in the process of foreign language acquisition. FLE, as one of the most typical and common positive emotions experienced by FL learners [ 4 ], can hedge against the negative emotions in the FL learning process and is therefore beneficial to facilitate FL learning. Furthermore, according to control-value theory [ 18 ], FLE is a positive academic emotion that generates high activation during ongoing learning activities or tasks. It has positive effects on SL learning outcomes, including motivation, engagement, and academic performance in SL learning [ 8 , 27 – 29 ].

An empirical study by Dewaele and MacIntyre [ 26 ] showed that FLE is negatively associated with anxiety. However, the question of how FLE relates to other FL learning emotions needs to be further explored. In addition, studies have confirmed that FLE is positively related to FL performance. For example, Dewaele and Alfawzan [ 9 ] found that FLE positively predicts students’ FL achievement based on a sample of 189 junior high school students in London and 152 Saudi Arabian elementary school students. Using a sample of 1,307 Chinese high school English as foreign language (EFL) students, Li [ 21 ] concluded that FLE positively predicts actual EFL achievement and self-perceived EFL achievement. Moreover, compared with EFL anxiety, FLE is more predictive of learners’ long-term development of FL proficiency [ 30 ] and is more sensitive to the FL learning environment and, therefore, easier to moderate in teaching [ 31 – 33 ].

Foreign language learning boredom.

The study of emotions in language learning has burgeoned within in the psychological study of FL learning [ 32 , 34 ]. However, limited attention has been devoted to FL learning boredom (FLLB) [ 35 – 38 ], despite the confirmation of its prevalence in FL classrooms [ 36 ]. Boredom is a “silent” emotion [ 39 ], it is easily overlooked by educators and researchers [ 40 – 43 ]. Conducting research on FLLB contributes to an enhanced understanding of negative emotions and enriches theoretical outcomes in EFL learning emotion research. This knowledge is instrumental in exploring effective strategies to establish conducive EFL learning environments, alleviate students’ boredom, optimize their EFL learning status [ 40 , 44 ], and improve their EFL learning self-regulation ability [ 45 ].

As an inhibitory negative emotion, FLLB negatively affects the psychological and behavioral processes of learning [ 46 ]. At the psychological level, boredom often co-occurs with a variety of other negative emotions, such as frustration, irritability, and loss of meaning. At the cognitive level, boredom is often accompanied by inattention, reduced learning engagement, and even distorted time perception. At the behavioral level, boredom can seriously hinder the motivation and maintenance of students’ learning [ 43 , 47 ].

Based on control-value theory, the above negative effects may further lead to lower academic performance [ 41 , 44 ]. Current empirical studies that verify this causal relationship include only one for college students taking EFL online classes [ 5 ] and one for Chinese EFL learners in urban and rural elementary schools [ 48 ]. However, the generalizability of this study’s findings still needs further validation; as the differences between online and offline teaching contexts may have different effects on students’ academic emotions and psychological processes of learning (e.g., sense of achievement) [ 5 , 44 , 49 ], the negative predictive effect of boredom on EFL achievement should be verified under different teaching modes. Because of the diverse types and wide distribution of higher education institutions in China, whether the findings of this study are applicable to geographic areas with highly different economic conditions, as well as to different levels and types of higher education institutions, remains to be explored as well.

Foreign language learning burnout.

Burnout, identified as the prominent negative emotion in FL learning, underscores the necessity for additional empirical studies to further explore its role in FL learning [ 50 ]. From a psychological point of view, just like any other profession, students are emotionally and behaviorally engaged in a variety of core activities that can be considered their work. That is, these activities are highly structured and mandatory (e.g., attending classes, completing assignments, and taking exams) and point to a specific goal (e.g., passing an exam) [ 51 ]. Hu and Schaufeli [ 52 ] emphasized that students need to engage in structured, purposeful, and compulsory learning activities (e.g., attending classes, completing assignments, and taking exams) and are also vulnerable to burnout, which they defined as students’ emotional exhaustion and cynicism toward people or events related to learning, as well as reduced academic efficacy and self-confidence.

Recently, researchers have started to explore EFL learners’ burnout by investigating how it interacts with internal and external factors in EFL learners’ learning language. The role of positive emotions and self-regulatory capacity in mitigating burnout has been explored, emphasizing the importance of fostering resilience and positive emotional experiences in educational settings [ 53 , 54 ]. In China, English learning is strongly test oriented, so students are more likely to experience burnout, which affects their learning outcomes and well-being. This situation highlights the need for empirical research on EFL learning burnout among students in China [ 4 , 8 , 13 ]. The present study is a response to this call. Given the significance of College English Test Band 4 (CET-4) scores for non-English major college students’ degree certificates and career prospects, the distress experienced in these learning activities may manifest as generalized anxiety, depression, or specific burnout [ 55 ]. Thus, choosing EFL burnout as another indicator for EFL academic affect in this study and investigating its relationship with EFL test scores are reasonable.

Relationship between academic buoyancy and academic achievement.

With the positive turn in SLA research in recent years, researchers have begun to explore the role of learners’ positive qualities in sustaining motivation and interest, guiding students to respond positively to external challenges [ 56 ], and fostering and enhancing students’ academic buoyancy. The concept of academic buoyancy was first introduced by Martin and Marsh [ 57 ] and refers to the ability of students to successfully overcome the difficulties and challenges they encounter in their day-to-day academic activities. Common adversities encompass temporary episodes of academic underperformance, the stress and pressure associated with learning and testing, low confidence resulting from a poor grade, transient declines in motivation and engagement, and dealing with teachers when receiving poor feedback on a piece of work [ 58 ]. Researchers generally agree that academic buoyancy is associated with adaptive responses to adversity, including strengthening positive emotions and weakening negative emotions [ 59 ].

Academic buoyancy in SLA is a concretization of the concept of academic buoyancy in EFL learning, which refers to “the ability providing learners with the capacity to negotiate the ups and downs of everyday language learning, sustain prolonged effort, and overcome setbacks on the path to second language (L2) learning success” [ 60 ]. After examining the literature thoroughly, we found that the effect of academic buoyancy on academic achievement has drawn the attention of researchers, as the research themes related to academic buoyancy have deepened. Academic performance involves academic achievement, engagement, use of learning strategies, and coping with academic adversity. Academic buoyancy has been shown to optimize academic achievement [ 61 – 63 ]. Academic buoyancy, described as an adaptive response to minor academic adversity, might shield against the detrimental effects of negative emotions on academic achievement. Despite these theoretical propositions, empirical evidence supporting these relationships remains limited [ 59 ]. Consequently, our hypothesis posits that academic buoyancy may moderate EFL academic emotions.

Employing Latent Moderated Structural Equation Modeling (LMS), this research comprehensively investigates the correlation between enjoyment, boredom, burnout, and foreign language academic achievement among Chinese EFL learners. LMS is chosen for its efficacy in exploring interactions between latent variables, such as mental health, and academic achievement. This method offers statistical efficiency, requiring estimation of only one parameter, and is accessible through widely-used software like Mplus [ 64 ]. By utilizing this approach, the study endeavors to shed light on the complex interplay of EFL academic emotions and the moderating effect of academic buoyancy, contributing to a deeper understanding of factors impacting academic achievement in this context.

Succinctly stated, the present study aims to test the following hypotheses ( Fig 1 ):

• Hypothesis 1 : Enjoyment is significantly negatively correlated with boredom and burnout, whereas boredom is significantly positively correlated with burnout.
• Hypothesis 2 : Enjoyment positively predicts English test performance, whereas boredom and burnout negatively predict English test performance.
• Hypothesis 3 : Academic buoyancy plays a moderating role in the relationship between enjoyment, boredom, and burnout and English language test performance.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310281.g001

Research methods

Participants and procedure.

This study was formally conducted at the beginning of the second semester of academic year 2021–2022, and the EFL students who participated in this survey were involved in a college English course for at least one semester to ensure the reliability of the research data. Purposive and convenience sampling methods were used, and the questionnaires were distributed to the students in the college English course taught by the first researcher, and then this task was delegated to her colleagues, who were asked to distribute the questionnaires to their college EFL students. Data collection was conducted using both online communication tools and online questionnaire platforms. To ensure a certain degree of privacy for the participants, the researchers informed all respondents that the results would be used for research purposes only. The procedural controls included anonymous responses, confidentiality of responses, and other means, and a common method bias test was conducted on the question items of the scales used through AMOS 24.0, which showed poor model fit and, therefore, a presumption that the data did not have significant common method bias issues.

A total of 589 questionnaires were returned, and after invalid questionnaires (i.e. straightliners) were eliminated, a total of 563 valid questionnaires were retained, with a valid return rate of 95.59%. Among the subjects, 262 (46.54%) were male and 301 (53.46%) were female; 264 (46.89%) were freshmen, and 299 (53.11%) were sophomores. The mean age of the tested students was 19.49 years, with a standard deviation (SD) of 0.589.

This study used a quantitative research approach with a combination questionnaire to obtain quantitative data. The instruments are described as follows.

Chinese version of the foreign language enjoyment scale.

Li et al. [ 4 ] localized and revised The Foreign Language Enjoyment Scale [ 25 ] based on a sample of Chinese high school EFL learners (n = 2,078). The revised scale (Chinese version of the Foreign Language Enjoyment Scale [CFLES]) contains 11 items covering three dimensions: FLE-Private , FLE-Teacher , and FLE-Atmosphere . It is a standard five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = neither agree nor disagree; 4 = agree; 5 = agree strongly). The scale has high reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.83) and validity, and it is a reliable and valid localized scale for FLE research in China [ 4 ]. In this study, the Cronbach’s α values for the global CFLES and its three subscales were 0.880, 0.750, 0.717, and 0.704, respectively, indicating good reliability. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy index was 0.912 (> 0.6), and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant ( χ 2 ( df = 55, N = 563) = 4974.181, p < 0.001), indicating the appropriateness of the data for factor analysis. CFA showed a good fit to the data, χ 2 = 119.793, df = 41, RMSEA = 0.058, CFI = 0.984, TLI = 0.979, SRMR = 0.025.

Foreign language learning boredom scale.

The Foreign Language Learning Boredom Scale was developed by Li et al. [ 46 ] based on the results of a large-scale survey of non-English major EFL students in Chinese universities. A total of 32 questions were included, and each participant responded on a standard five-point Likert scale. The scale differentiates seven main dimensions of FLB: FL classroom boredom, under-challenging task boredom, PowerPoint presentation boredom, homework boredom, teacher-dislike boredom, general learning trait boredom, and over-challenging or meaningless task boredom. In this study, the Cronbach’s α values for the global FLLBS and its seven subscales were 0.972, 0.894, 0.851, 0.800, 0.835, 0.816, 0.855, and 0.788, respectively, indicating high reliability. The KMO measure of sampling adequacy index was 0.949, and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant ( χ 2 ( df = 496, N = 563) = 14497.077, p < 0.001). The CFA showed a good fit to the data, χ 2 = 1200.027, df = 443, RMSEA = 0.055, CFI = 0.947, TLI = 0.941, SRMR = 0.036.

Maslach Burnout Inventory-EFL Student Survey.

The Maslach Burnout Inventory-EFL Student Survey was finalized by Li et al. [ 13 ] based on a sample of Chinese secondary school EFL students (n = 1718) and reformulated the 15-item Maslach Burnout Inventory-Student Survey. It differentiates three main dimensions of EFL students’ burnout: exhaustion, cynicism, and reduced efficacy. A total of 10 questions answered on a standard five-point Likert scale were included. In this study, the Cronbach’s α values for the global Maslach Burnout Inventory-EFL Student Survey and its three subscales were 0.931, 0.851, 0.789, and 0.808, respectively, indicating high reliability. The KMO measure of sampling adequacy index was 0.873, and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant ( χ 2 ( df = 45, N = 563) = 3972.914, p < 0.001). The CFA showed a good fit to the data, χ 2 = 71.227, df = 32, RMSEA = 0.047, CFI = 0.990, TLI = 0.986, SRMR = 0.022.

Academic buoyancy scale.

This study used the Academic Buoyancy Scale [ 57 ], which contains four items, to measure the academic buoyancy of non-English major college students. We adapted the four items to the context of the study, for example, “I think I’m good at dealing with pressures (in EFL learning)”. To each item, students rated themselves on a 1 to 5 scale. The KMO measure of sampling adequacy index was 0.857, and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant ( χ 2 ( df = 6, N = 563) = 1915.678, p < 0.001). The internal consistency reliability of the global ABS was good in this study (Cronbach’s α = 0.838). The CFA showed a good fit to the data, χ 2 = 4.151, df = 2, RMSEA = 0.044, CFI = 0.999, TLI = 0.997, SRMR = 0.008.

EFL academic achievement.

The dependent variable in this study was EFL academic achievement. Specifically, the scores obtained by the EFL students when they took the CET-4 in December 2021 were collected (M = 402.74; SD = 83.624). The CET-4 was chosen as the dependent variable in this study for three reasons. First, the CET-4 is an EFL test with high reliability and validity in China, as it is developed by the Examination Center of the Ministry of Education of China. Second, the theoretical perspective of this study, PP, focuses on the relationship between students’ academic emotions and academic achievement. Compared with general EFL proficiency tests or final exams, the CET-4 is more difficult, has a wider range of knowledge examined, and is more prominently important to most Chinese EFL learners; therefore, it is more possible to trigger negative emotions in learners [ 65 ]. Third, the CET-4 is one of the most widely tested English exams in China and has had a significant impact on the teaching of English courses, with some universities linking it to degree certificates and integrating it into the English curriculum. Therefore, the selection of CET-4 scores that match the syllabus and course objectives fits the concept of academic achievement.

Data analysis

The data from this study were analyzed mainly using SPSS 26.0 and Mplus 8.3. The analysis process was as follows. First, a descriptive statistical analysis of the samples was performed using SPSS to obtain the mean and SD of each dimension.

The factor structure of the scales used was examined using CFA, and bivariate correlations were estimated between all latent variables. Second, structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to estimate the interrelationship between EFL academic emotions and test performance. The bootstrap method was also used to examine the moderating effect of academic buoyancy on the relationship between academic emotions and test performance.

Following the recommendations of Hu and Bentler [ 66 ], the following model fit indices were used for evaluation: Chi-square/df (1 < χ 2 / df < 3), RMSEA < 0.08, CFI > 0.90, and TLI > 0.90.

Descriptive statistics

We examined gender and grade differences in FLE, boredom, burnout, academic buoyancy, and CET-4 performance among EFL college students. The results of the MANOVA tests are shown in Table 1 .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310281.t001

There were no significant differences in the scores for enjoyment, boredom, burnout, academic buoyancy, and CET-4 performance among students of different genders. There were also no significant differences in the scores of FLLB, burnout, and academic buoyancy among students in different grades; there were significant differences in the scores for enjoyment (F (1,547) = 4.802, η 2 = 0.008, p < 0.05) and CET-4 performance (F (1,560) = 11.147, η 2 = 0.019, p < 0.01) among students in different grades.

Latent bivariate correlations

We constructed a measurement model encompassing EFL achievement emotions, academic buoyancy, and performance on the CET-4 test to evaluate latent bivariate correlations. Grade (0 = freshman year, 1 = sophomore year) was added as a covariate and treated as a manifest variable.

The CFA showed a good fit to the data, χ 2 = 3125.200, df = 1578, RMSEA = 0.042, CFI = 0.941, TLI = 0.938, SRMR = 0.063, and we then analyzed the correlation coefficients ( Table 2 ). It was found that enjoyment and academic buoyancy showed positive correlated with CET-4 test performance, whereas boredom and burnout were negatively correlated with it. Sophomores reported higher EFL enjoyment and higher CET-4 test performance.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310281.t002

Moderating effect of academic buoyancy on the relationship between FL academic emotions and test performance

We employed the LMS approach implemented in Mplus 8.3 [ 67 ] to estimate interactions between academic buoyancy and enjoyment, boredom, as well as anxiety in a single model. First, we tested the baseline model without an interaction term. In this study, the missing values were processed using the method of maximum likelihood, which preserves the existing data as much as possible, resulting in better unbiased parameter estimates and more accurate standard errors (SEs) [ 68 ]. SEM (M0) was constructed using enjoyment, boredom, and burnout as the predictor variables, academic buoyancy as a moderating variable, test performance as an outcome variable, and grade as a control variable.

In turn, the model (M1) with the latent moderated term was tested. Absolute model fit indices are not provided in the LMS approach. However, establishing whether a model including an interaction term offers a better fit to the data using relative fit indices [ 69 ], such as the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and the Loglikelihood ratio test, is possible.

A better model fit is indicated by smaller AIC and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) values [ 70 ] and a larger R-Square ( R 2 ) in explaining the variance of the outcome. In this study, the model (M1) including three interaction terms (academic buoyancy × enjoyment, academic buoyancy × boredom, academic buoyancy × burnout) showed an improved fit (ΔAIC = −67.168, ΔBIC = −54.167) and explained a greater proportion of variance in CET-4 test performance ( ΔR 2 = .0197). Furthermore, a statistically significant likelihood ratio test, D (1) = 37, p < 0.001, indicated a worse fit for the model (M0) without the three interaction terms. The LMS model is shown in Fig 2 .

Note . Path values are the standardized path coefficients (standard errors); *** p <0.001, ** p <0.01, * p <0.05. Grade was controlled.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310281.g002

In the LMS model, there were significant direct predictive relationships between enjoyment and test performance (B = 0.106, SE = 0.048, p < 0.01), burnout and test performance (B = −0.625, SE = 0.195, p < 0.001), and academic buoyancy and test performance (B = 0.153, SE = 0.047, p < 0.001). Of these, enjoyment and academic buoyancy were the positive predictors, whereas burnout was a negative predictor.

The structural coefficients are shown in Table 3 . Statistically significant interactions were observed between academic buoyancy and enjoyment, as well as between academic buoyancy and burnout. However, no significant interaction was found between academic buoyancy and boredom.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310281.t003

To facilitate interpretation of the interaction, we also plotted the relationship between academic buoyancy and test performance at ±1 SD enjoyment ( Fig 3 ) and ±1 SD burnout ( Fig 4 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310281.g003

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310281.g004

At −1 SD academic buoyancy, a negative relationship was observed between enjoyment and test performance ( B = −16.351, SE = 7.592) ( Table 3 ). This relationship was not significant at mean anxiety ( B = 9.361, SE = 5.240) and became positive at +1 SD academic buoyancy ( B = 35.072, SE = 7.112). The finding suggests that academic buoyancy had a negative effect on low EFL enjoyment but a favorable effect on high EFL enjoyment. In other words, in the presence of low EFL enjoyment, high academic buoyancy resulted in lower test scores than low academic buoyancy did. In the case of high EFL enjoyment, those with high academic buoyancy had higher test scores than those with low academic buoyancy. According to the model, increasing EFL enjoyment had a very different effect on EFL students with different levels of academic buoyancy.

At −1 SD academic buoyancy, a negative relationship was observed between burnout and test performance ( B = −116.762, SE = 39.867). This relationship was still negatively significant at mean academic buoyancy ( B = -67.177, SE = 22.058) and became not significant at +1 SD academic buoyancy ( B = −17.592, SE = 16.794). This finding suggests that burnout had almost no effect on higher academic buoyancy but had a greater negative effect on lower academic buoyancy. In other words, in the case of low burnout, high academic buoyancy was associated with lower test scores than low academic buoyancy was. In the case of high burnout, high academic buoyancy was associated with higher test scores than low academic buoyancy was. Based on this model, reducing burnout was evidently better for EFL students with low academic buoyancy.

Correlation between foreign language enjoyment, boredom, and burnout

The results of the latent bivariate correlation in this study refined the network of relationships between SLA emotions. Our findings affirm the undoing hypothesis of broaden-and-build theory [ 71 , 72 ], which states that positive emotions undo the lingering effects of negative emotions. The theory also posits that positive emotions, such as enjoyment, contribute to the broadening and building of personal resources, fostering resilience and engagement in learning contexts [ 19 ]. Thus, enjoyment not only enhances well-being but also serves as a critical buffer against the negative effects of boredom and burnout.

Moreover, we found a positive correlation between FLLB and burnout. In control-value theory, boredom is theorized to impair performance and achievement by undermining interest and intrinsic motivation, reducing cognitive resources, and promoting superficial learning [ 59 ]. A possible explanation is that, in a university setting, boredom predicts a lack of engagement in learning activities. Students who lack positive and inactive affects and attitudes regarding their work (e.g., low study engagement) are more vulnerable to burnout than students with high academic engagement [ 73 ]. The results of this study add new information to the existing literature about the relationship between EFL learning emotions, such as boredom, and other EFL learning emotions.

Correlations between FL academic emotions and academic achievement

The findings of this study provide new insights into the question of the predictive role of EFL emotions in academic performance by simultaneously examining enjoyment, boredom, and burnout within a single analytical framework, the research sheds light on their differential effects. It was found that enjoyment and burnout had predictive effects on EFL achievement, no significant association was observed between boredom and EFL performance.

EFL learning enjoyment, defined as the sense of accomplishment and reward derived from overcoming challenges in new and challenging environments, significantly correlates with personal well-being and development [ 25 ]. From the perspective of broaden-and-build theory, enjoyment, a positive activating emotion, can broaden students’ thought–action repertoires, thereby enhancing academic achievement though promoting interest and intrinsic motivation, maintaining cognitive resources, focusing attention on the task at hand, and supporting use of flexible and deep learning strategies as well as self-regulation of learning [ 19 , 59 ]. In addition, control-value theory posits that student learning is influenced by achievement emotions, such as enjoyment and burnout [ 18 ]. While acknowledging the existence of a relationship between FLLB and academic performance, as shown in Table 2 and consistent with Li and Han [ 5 ] and Li et al. [ 48 ], our results emphasize that enjoyment and burnout play a more pivotal role when integrated into the model. Notably, burnout exhibits stronger predictive power than enjoyment. In summary, our findings offer partial support for the second hypothesis. This differential impact underscores the nuanced nature of academic emotions, as described by control-value theory, where the valence and activation level of emotions differentially influence academic outcomes. Essentially, in terms of the three-dimensional taxonomy of control-value theory, enjoyment is a positive activating activity-focused emotion. Higher enjoyment fosters interest, diminishes burnout and boredom, thereby enhancing EFL exam performance [ 74 ].

This result partially corroborates the findings of the empirical studies by Li and Han [ 5 ] and Li et al. [ 75 ]. On the one hand, we validate broaden-and-build theory and control-value theory that positive academic emotions contribute to academic achievement, whereas negative academic emotions undermine academic achievement [ 18 ]. In other words, the more pleased the students feel, the less likely they are to feel burned out and bored; as a result, they perform better on exams. The triangular relationship between enjoyment, burnout, and English test performance confirms previous research [ 8 ], highlighting both the influence of emotions on academic performance and the association and interaction between positive and negative emotions, as well as providing support for broaden-and-build theory and control-value theory in the EFL learning context. On the other hand, the inclusion of boredom not only expanded the scope of the study but also further validated the applicability of the two theories in the EFL learning context. Importantly, beyond reinforcing previous findings, our study unveils novel insights into the nuanced interplay and distinct contributions of these emotions, advancing our understanding of their intricate relationship with EFL academic achievement.

The differences in the relationships between the three EFL learning emotions and test performance may be attributed to the different intrinsic characteristics of these emotions. According to the three-dimensional taxonomy of academic emotions in control-value theory [ 24 ], EFL learning enjoyment is an activity-focused and high-arousal positive emotion, boredom is an activity-focused and low-arousal negative emotion, and burnout is an outcome-focused and low-arousal negative emotion. Currently, the test-oriented phenomenon of EFL teaching in Chinese universities is prominent [ 7 ]. Chinese students may also be under the pressure of performing academically perfectly to live up to the expectations of their significant others and to maintain their own social identity [ 13 ]. In this teaching environment, the main purpose of students in learning English is to pass exams. Therefore, test scores are more closely related to outcome-focused academic emotions, such as burnout.

The moderating effect of academic buoyancy

Academic buoyancy has gradually attracted attention in the field of EFL learning and teaching [ 62 ]. From a conceptual standpoint, higher levels of academic buoyancy can moderate (i.e., buffer) the effects of academic challenges on subsequent outcomes [ 60 , 76 ]. The observed model of moderating effects partially supports our third hypothesis. While higher academic buoyancy did not have a significant beneficial effect on test performance in the case of low EFL learning burnout, it mitigated the impact on test performance to some extent in the case of high burnout. That is, the higher the level of EFL learning burnout, the more that the value of higher academic buoyancy on academic performance was accentuated. This result implies that academic buoyancy acts as a safeguard against the negative impact of elevated burnout levels in foreign language learning on test performance. It also indicates that higher academic buoyancy does not protect test performance at lower levels of enjoyment but rather amplifies test performance at higher levels of enjoyment. This finding underscores that academic buoyancy helps reinforce the beneficial effects of EFL learning enjoyment, a positive emotion, on test performance. As Xu and Wang [ 63 ] mentioned that academic buoyancy fosters learning behaviors through the creation of a learning atmosphere where positive emotions are initiated.

Theoretically, academic buoyancy is associated with adaptive responses to adversity, including enhancing positive emotions and reducing negative emotions [ 59 ]. Furthermore, academic buoyancy reduces not only the intensity of emotions like anxiety and boredom, but also their adverse effects on academic achievement. The findings of this study showed that lower levels of academic buoyancy had little effect on the negative relationship between EFL learning burnout and test performance. As academic buoyancy increased, it buffered the negative effects of burnout, thus diminishing the negative relationship between burnout and test performance. That is, at lower levels of burnout, there was little difference in achievement between EFL students with lower academic buoyancy and those with higher academic buoyancy. However, as burnout increased, EFL students with higher academic buoyancy showed higher achievement than students with lower academic buoyancy.

Currently, there is a paucity of research related to learners’ academic buoyancy within the field of SLA. Limited exploration within educational psychology has explored the potential moderating role of academic buoyancy. Martin and Marsh [ 76 ] found a marginal impact of the interaction between academic buoyancy and academic adversity on subsequent academic adversity among secondary school students. Putwain et al. [ 59 ] identified that academic buoyancy moderates the relationship between anxiety and mathematics test performance among elementary school students. Test performance was highest when anxiety was low and academic buoyancy was high. Subsequently, Putwain et al. [ 77 ] found that academic buoyancy protects end-of-year test grades from minor adversities in upper secondary students. In our study, we extend this understanding, proposing that EFL academic buoyancy mitigates (or facilitates) the negative (or positive) effects of burnout (or enjoyment) on test performance. This is in line with the findings of Wu et al. [ 54 ], who highlighted the crucial role of resilience in mitigating the adverse effects of burnout among EFL learners. The following considerations may explain this pattern.

First, enjoyment is pivotal in EFL academic contexts, positively influencing students’ well-being, motivation, engagement, and psychological resilience [ 4 , 78 ]. Academic buoyancy can be used to explain the above everyday academic resilience [ 57 , 58 ]. As posited by Skinner et al. [ 79 , 80 ], heightened academic resilience correlates with increased academic engagement, adaptive coping strategies, and enhanced academic persistence. Consequently, EFL students with higher academic buoyancy exhibit positive attitudes towards challenges, amplifying the favorable impact of enjoyment on test scores.

Second, the study found that high academic buoyancy also protects students’ test performance, especially as burnout increases and academic buoyancy provides more and more protection. This finding corroborates the buffering effect of academic buoyancy [ 76 ], in which the negative effects of negative emotions on academic performance are fully or partially mitigated in students with high academic buoyancy. Although less research has focused on the protective effect of academic buoyancy on academic performance in EFL, as Putwain et al. [ 81 ] found, the indirect negative relationship between test anxiety and test achievement is reduced in highly academically buoyant students. Further substantiating this protective effect, Hirvonen et al. [ 82 ] stated that high academic buoyancy is linked to reduced avoidance behaviors, fewer failure expectations, and higher task-oriented planning via academic emotions. High academic buoyancy was associated with low boredom and hopelessness, leading to lower expectations of failure. Thus, students with high academic buoyancy can cope with the ongoing challenges and frustrations presented to them [ 57 , 58 ] and become more resilient in the process.

This study constructed a moderating effect model of EFL learning emotions predicting test performance. We found that EFL learners’ learning enjoyment, boredom, burnout, academic buoyancy, and academic performance were significantly correlated. It concluded that academic buoyancy helped students cope with higher levels of EFL learning burnout. Academic buoyancy motivated students to perform better at higher levels of enjoyment. It also investigated the mechanism by which EFL learners’ emotions and academic buoyancy are linked to each other and jointly influence EFL academic performance. The possible moderating effect of academic buoyancy was further verified through an analysis of such an effect. This study reaffirms the good applicability of educational psychology and PP theories to EFL teaching research. The results suggest that to contribute to students’ academic achievement, EFL teachers need to actively pay attention to individual differences in students’ emotions and to their emotional changes; they also need to exert effort to create a positive EFL learning atmosphere for students while guiding them to face their negative emotions. Interventions such as structured emotional support programs and workshops aimed at building academic buoyancy among students can be particularly beneficial. Implementing professional development programs for teachers focusing on emotional intelligence and its application in the classroom can also equip instructors with the skills needed to manage and positively influence students’ emotional states.

Despite these implications, this study suffers its own limitations, too. First, due to the intricate nature of EFL learners’ emotions, it is advisable for future studies to utilize longitudinal studies to reveal the dynamic interplay between academic emotions and EFL proficiency [ 12 ], enhancing our nuanced understanding of this complex relationship. Second, the study relies on self-reported data, which may be subject to social desirability bias and affect the accuracy of the findings. Future research should incorporate multiple data sources, including observation and reflections, to validate the results. Third, the sample is limited to EFL learners in a specific cultural context, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other EFL learning contexts. Further studies should consider diverse cultural settings to explore the universality of the observed patterns.

Supporting information

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310281.s001

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• PubMed/NCBI
• 20. Li, C. A positive psychology perspective on Chinese students’ emotional intelligence, classroom emotions, and EFL learning achievement [dissertation]. Xiamen: Xiamen University; 2018.
• 24. Pekrun R, Perry RP. Control-value theory of achievement emotions. Pekrun R., and Linnenbrink-Garcia L., Editors, International Handbook of Emotions in Education. New York: Routledge; 2014.
• 26. Dewaele JM, MacIntyre PD. Foreign language enjoyment and foreign language classroom anxiety: The right and left feet of FL learning? MacIntyre PD., Gregersen T., and Mercer S., Editors, Positive Psychology in SLA. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters; 2016.
• 36. Kruk M, Zawodniak J. Boredom in practical English language classes: Insights from interview data. Szymański L., Zawodniak J., Łobodziec A., and Smoluk M. Editors, Interdisciplinary Views on the English Language, Literature and Culture. Zielona Góra: Uniwersytet Zielonogórski; 2018.
• 40. Chapman K. E. Boredom in the German Foreign Language Classroom [dissertation]. Madison: University of Wisconsin-Madison; 2013.
• 67. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthen and Muthen; 2017.
• 72. Fredrickson BL. Positive emotions broaden and build. Devine P., Plant A., Editors, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Burlington: Academic; 2013.
• 74. Wilson PA, Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk B. Shame and anxiety with foreign language learners. Mayer C. H., and Venderheiden E., Editors, The Bright Side of Shame. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2019.
• 78. Pekrun R, Linnenbrink-Garcia L. International handbook of emotions in education. London: Routledge; 2014.
• 80. Skinner E, Pitzer J, Brule H. The role of emotion in engagement, coping, and the development of motivational resilience. PEKRUN R., and LINNENBRINK-GARCIA L., Editors, International Handbook of Emotions in Education. New York: Routledge; 2014.

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Microb Biotechnol
• v.15(11); 2022 Nov

On the role of hypotheses in science

Harald brüssow.

1 Laboratory of Gene Technology, Department of Biosystems, KU Leuven, Leuven Belgium

Associated Data

Scientific research progresses by the dialectic dialogue between hypothesis building and the experimental testing of these hypotheses. Microbiologists as biologists in general can rely on an increasing set of sophisticated experimental methods for hypothesis testing such that many scientists maintain that progress in biology essentially comes with new experimental tools. While this is certainly true, the importance of hypothesis building in science should not be neglected. Some scientists rely on intuition for hypothesis building. However, there is also a large body of philosophical thinking on hypothesis building whose knowledge may be of use to young scientists. The present essay presents a primer into philosophical thoughts on hypothesis building and illustrates it with two hypotheses that played a major role in the history of science (the parallel axiom and the fifth element hypothesis). It continues with philosophical concepts on hypotheses as a calculus that fits observations (Copernicus), the need for plausibility (Descartes and Gilbert) and for explicatory power imposing a strong selection on theories (Darwin, James and Dewey). Galilei introduced and James and Poincaré later justified the reductionist principle in hypothesis building. Waddington stressed the feed‐forward aspect of fruitful hypothesis building, while Poincaré called for a dialogue between experiment and hypothesis and distinguished false, true, fruitful and dangerous hypotheses. Theoretical biology plays a much lesser role than theoretical physics because physical thinking strives for unification principle across the universe while biology is confronted with a breathtaking diversity of life forms and its historical development on a single planet. Knowledge of the philosophical foundations on hypothesis building in science might stimulate more hypothesis‐driven experimentation that simple observation‐oriented “fishing expeditions” in biological research.

Short abstract

Scientific research progresses by the dialectic dialogue between hypothesis building and the experimental testing of these hypotheses. Microbiologists can rely on an increasing set of sophisticated experimental methods for hypothesis testing but the importance of hypothesis building in science should not be neglected. This Lilliput offers a primer on philosophical concepts on hypotheses in science.

INTRODUCTION

Philosophy of science and the theory of knowledge (epistemology) are important branches of philosophy. However, philosophy has over the centuries lost its dominant role it enjoyed in antiquity and became in Medieval Ages the maid of theology (ancilla theologiae) and after the rise of natural sciences and its technological applications many practising scientists and the general public doubt whether they need philosophical concepts in their professional and private life. This is in the opinion of the writer of this article, an applied microbiologist, shortsighted for several reasons. Philosophers of the 20th century have made important contributions to the theory of knowledge, and many eminent scientists grew interested in philosophical problems. Mathematics which plays such a prominent role in physics and increasingly also in other branches of science is a hybrid: to some extent, it is the paradigm of an exact science while its abstract aspects are deeply rooted in philosophical thinking. In the present essay, the focus is on hypothesis and hypothesis building in science, essentially it is a compilation what philosophers and scientists thought about this subject in past and present. The controversy between the mathematical mind and that of the practical mind is an old one. The philosopher, physicist and mathematician Pascal ( 1623 –1662a) wrote in his Pensées : “Mathematicians who are only mathematicians have exact minds, provided all things are explained to them by means of definitions and axioms; otherwise they are inaccurate. They are only right when the principles are quite clear. And men of intuition cannot have the patience to reach to first principles of things speculative and conceptional, which they have never seen in the world and which are altogether out of the common. The intellect can be strong and narrow, and can be comprehensive and weak.” Hypothesis building is an act both of intuition and exact thinking and I hope that theoretical knowledge about hypothesis building will also profit young microbiologists.

HYPOTHESES AND AXIOMS IN MATHEMATICS

In the following, I will illustrate the importance of hypothesis building for the history of science and the development of knowledge and illustrate it with two famous concepts, the parallel axiom in mathematics and the five elements hypothesis in physics.

Euclidean geometry

The prominent role of hypotheses in the development of science becomes already clear in the first science book of the Western civilization: Euclid's The Elements written about 300 BC starts with a set of statements called Definitions, Postulates and Common Notions that lay out the foundation of geometry (Euclid,  c.323‐c.283 ). This axiomatic approach is very modern as exemplified by the fact that Euclid's book remained for long time after the Bible the most read book in the Western hemisphere and a backbone of school teaching in mathematics. Euclid's twenty‐three definitions start with sentences such as “1. A point is that which has no part; 2. A line is breadthless length; 3. The extremities of a line are points”; and continues with the definition of angles (“8. A plane angle is the inclination to one another of two lines in a plane which meet one another and do not lie in a straight line”) and that of circles, triangles and quadrilateral figures. For the history of science, the 23rd definition of parallels is particularly interesting: “Parallel straight lines are straight lines which, being in the same plane and being produced indefinitely in both directions, do not meet one another in either direction”. This is the famous parallel axiom. It is clear that the parallel axiom cannot be the result of experimental observations, but must be a concept created in the mind. Euclid ends with five Common Notions (“1. Things which are equal to the same thing are also equal to one another, to 5. The whole is greater than the part”). The establishment of a contradiction‐free system for a branch of mathematics based on a set of axioms from which theorems were deduced was revolutionary modern. Hilbert ( 1899 ) formulated a sound modern formulation for Euclidian geometry. Hilbert's axiom system contains the notions “point, line and plane” and the concepts of “betweenness, containment and congruence” leading to five axioms, namely the axioms of Incidence (“Verknüpfung”), of Order (“Anordnung”), of Congruence, of Continuity (“Stetigkeit”) and of Parallels.

Origin of axioms

Philosophers gave various explanations for the origin of the Euclidean hypotheses or axioms. Plato considered geometrical figures as related to ideas (the true things behind the world of appearances). Aristoteles considered geometric figures as abstractions of physical bodies. Descartes perceived geometric figures as inborn ideas from extended bodies ( res extensa ), while Pascal thought that the axioms of Euclidian geometry were derived from intuition. Kant reasoned that Euclidian geometry represented a priori perceptions of space. Newton considered geometry as part of general mechanics linked to theories of measurement. Hilbert argued that the axioms of mathematical geometry are neither the result of contemplation (“Anschauung”) nor of psychological source. For him, axioms were formal propositions (“formale Aussageformen”) characterized by consistency (“Widerspruchsfreiheit”, i.e. absence of contradiction) (Mittelstrass,  1980a ).

Definitions

Axioms were also differently defined by philosophers. In Topics , Aristoteles calls axioms the assumptions taken up by one partner of a dialogue to initiate a dialectic discussion. Plato states that an axiom needs to be an acceptable or credible proposition, which cannot be justified by reference to other statements. Yet, a justification is not necessary because an axiom is an evident statement. In modern definition, axioms are methodical first sentences in the foundation of a deductive science (Mittelstrass,  1980a ). In Posterior Analytics , Aristotle defines postulates as positions which are at least initially not accepted by the dialogue partners while hypotheses are accepted for the sake of reasoning. In Euclid's book, postulates are construction methods that assure the existence of the geometric objects. Today postulates and axioms are used as synonyms while the 18th‐century philosophy made differences: Lambert defined axioms as descriptive sentences and postulates as prescriptive sentences. According to Kant, mathematical postulates create (synthesize) concepts (Mittelstrass,  1980b ). Definitions then fix the use of signs; they can be semantic definitions that explain the proper meaning of a sign in common language use (in a dictionary style) or they can be syntactic definitions that regulate the use of these signs in formal operations. Nominal definitions explain the words, while real definitions explain the meaning or the nature of the defined object. Definitions are thus essential for the development of a language of science, assuring communication and mutual understanding (Mittelstrass,  1980c ). Finally, hypotheses are also frequently defined as consistent conjectures that are compatible with the available knowledge. The truth of the hypothesis is only supposed in order to explain true observations and facts. Consequences of this hypothetical assumptions should explain the observed facts. Normally, descriptive hypotheses precede explanatory hypotheses in the development of scientific thought. Sometimes only tentative concepts are introduced as working hypotheses to test whether they have an explanatory capacity for the observations (Mittelstrass,  1980d ).

The Euclidian geometry is constructed along a logical “if→then” concept. The “if‐clause” formulates at the beginning the supposition, the “then clause” formulates the consequences from these axioms which provides a system of geometric theorems or insights. The conclusions do not follow directly from the hypothesis; this would otherwise represent self‐evident immediate conclusions. The “if‐then” concept in geometry is not used as in other branches of science where the consequences deduced from the axioms are checked against reality whether they are true, in order to confirm the validity of the hypothesis. The task in mathematics is: what can be logically deduced from a given set of axioms to build a contradiction‐free system of geometry. Whether this applies to the real world is in contrast to the situation in natural sciences another question and absolutely secondary to mathematics (Syntopicon,  1992 ).

Pascal's rules for hypotheses

In his Scientific Treatises on Geometric Demonstrations , Pascal ( 1623‐1662b ) formulates “Five rules are absolutely necessary and we cannot dispense with them without an essential defect and frequently even error. Do not leave undefined any terms at all obscure or ambiguous. Use in definitions of terms only words perfectly well known or already explained. Do not fail to ask that each of the necessary principles be granted, however clear and evident it may be. Ask only that perfectly self‐evident things be granted as axioms. Prove all propositions, using for their proof only axioms that are perfectly self‐evident or propositions already demonstrated or granted. Never get caught in the ambiguity of terms by failing to substitute in thought the definitions which restrict or define them. One should accept as true only those things whose contradiction appears to be false. We may then boldly affirm the original statement, however incomprehensible it is.”

Kant's rules on hypotheses

Kant ( 1724–1804 ) wrote that the analysis described in his book The Critique of Pure Reason “has now taught us that all its efforts to extend the bounds of knowledge by means of pure speculation, are utterly fruitless. So much the wider field lies open to hypothesis; as where we cannot know with certainty, we are at liberty to make guesses and to form suppositions. Imagination may be allowed, under the strict surveillance of reason, to invent suppositions; but these must be based on something that is perfectly certain‐ and that is the possibility of the object. Such a supposition is termed a hypothesis. We cannot imagine or invent any object or any property of an object not given in experience and employ it in a hypothesis; otherwise we should be basing our chain of reasoning upon mere chimerical fancies and not upon conception of things. Thus, we have no right to assume of new powers, not existing in nature and consequently we cannot assume that there is any other kind of community among substances than that observable in experience, any kind of presence than that in space and any kind of duration than that in time. The conditions of possible experience are for reason the only conditions of the possibility of things. Otherwise, such conceptions, although not self‐contradictory, are without object and without application. Transcendental hypotheses are therefore inadmissible, and we cannot use the liberty of employing in the absence of physical, hyperphysical grounds of explanation because such hypotheses do not advance reason, but rather stop it in its progress. When the explanation of natural phenomena happens to be difficult, we have constantly at hand a transcendental ground of explanation, which lifts us above the necessity of investigating nature. The next requisite for the admissibility of a hypothesis is its sufficiency. That is it must determine a priori the consequences which are given in experience and which are supposed to follow from the hypothesis itself.” Kant stresses another aspect when dealing with hypotheses: “It is our duty to try to discover new objections, to put weapons in the hands of our opponent, and to grant him the most favorable position. We have nothing to fear from these concessions; on the contrary, we may rather hope that we shall thus make ourselves master of a possession which no one will ever venture to dispute.”

For Kant's analytical and synthetical judgements and Difference between philosophy and mathematics (Kant, Whitehead) , see Appendices  S1 and S2 , respectively.

Poincaré on hypotheses

The mathematician‐philosopher Poincaré ( 1854 –1912a) explored the foundation of mathematics and physics in his book Science and Hypothesis . In the preface to the book, he summarizes common thinking of scientists at the end of the 19th century. “To the superficial observer scientific truth is unassailable, the logic of science is infallible, and if scientific men sometimes make mistakes, it is because they have not understood the rules of the game. Mathematical truths are derived from a few self‐evident propositions, by a chain of flawless reasoning, they are imposed not only by us, but on Nature itself. This is for the minds of most people the origin of certainty in science.” Poincaré then continues “but upon more mature reflection the position held by hypothesis was seen; it was recognized that it is as necessary to the experimenter as it is to the mathematician. And then the doubt arose if all these constructions are built on solid foundations.” However, “to doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions: both dispense with the necessity of reflection. Instead, we should examine with the utmost care the role of hypothesis; we shall then recognize not only that it is necessary, but that in most cases it is legitimate. We shall also see that there are several kinds of hypotheses; that some are verifiable and when once confirmed by experiment become truths of great fertility; that others may be useful to us in fixing our ideas; and finally that others are hypotheses only in appearance, and reduce to definitions or to conventions in disguise.” Poincaré argues that “we must seek mathematical thought where it has remained pure‐i.e. in arithmetic, in the proofs of the most elementary theorems. The process is proof by recurrence. We first show that a theorem is true for n  = 1; we then show that if it is true for n –1 it is true for n; and we conclude that it is true for all integers. The essential characteristic of reasoning by recurrence is that it contains, condensed in a single formula, an infinite number of syllogisms.” Syllogism is logical argument that applies deductive reasoning to arrive at a conclusion. Poincaré notes “that here is a striking analogy with the usual process of induction. But an essential difference exists. Induction applied to the physical sciences is always uncertain because it is based on the belief in a general order of the universe, an order which is external to us. Mathematical induction‐ i.e. proof by recurrence – is on the contrary, necessarily imposed on us, because it is only the affirmation of a property of the mind itself. No doubt mathematical recurrent reasoning and physical inductive reasoning are based on different foundations, but they move in parallel lines and in the same direction‐namely, from the particular to the general.”

Non‐Euclidian geometry: from Gauss to Lobatschewsky

Mathematics is an abstract science that intrinsically does not request that the structures described reflect a physical reality. Paradoxically, mathematics is the language of physics since the founder of experimental physics Galilei used Euclidian geometry when exploring the laws of the free fall. In his 1623 treatise The Assayer , Galilei ( 1564 –1642a) famously formulated that the book of Nature is written in the language of mathematics, thus establishing a link between formal concepts in mathematics and the structure of the physical world. Euclid's parallel axiom played historically a prominent role for the connection between mathematical concepts and physical realities. Mathematicians had doubted that the parallel axiom was needed and tried to prove it. In Euclidian geometry, there is a connection between the parallel axiom and the sum of the angles in a triangle being two right angles. It is therefore revealing that the famous mathematician C.F. Gauss investigated in the early 19th century experimentally whether this Euclidian theorem applies in nature. He approached this problem by measuring the sum of angles in a real triangle by using geodetic angle measurements of three geographical elevations in the vicinity of Göttingen where he was teaching mathematics. He reportedly measured a sum of the angles in this triangle that differed from 180°. Gauss had at the same time also developed statistical methods to evaluate the accuracy of measurements. Apparently, the difference of his measured angles was still within the interval of Gaussian error propagation. He did not publish the reasoning and the results for this experiment because he feared the outcry of colleagues about this unorthodox, even heretical approach to mathematical reasoning (Carnap,  1891 ‐1970a). However, soon afterwards non‐Euclidian geometries were developed. In the words of Poincaré, “Lobatschewsky assumes at the outset that several parallels may be drawn through a point to a given straight line, and he retains all the other axioms of Euclid. From these hypotheses he deduces a series of theorems between which it is impossible to find any contradiction, and he constructs a geometry as impeccable in its logic as Euclidian geometry. The theorems are very different, however, from those to which we are accustomed, and at first will be found a little disconcerting. For instance, the sum of the angles of a triangle is always less than two right angles, and the difference between that sum and two right angles is proportional to the area of the triangle. Lobatschewsky's propositions have no relation to those of Euclid, but are none the less logically interconnected.” Poincaré continues “most mathematicians regard Lobatschewsky's geometry as a mere logical curiosity. Some of them have, however, gone further. If several geometries are possible, they say, is it certain that our geometry is true? Experiments no doubt teaches us that the sum of the angles of a triangle is equal to two right angles, but this is because the triangles we deal with are too small” (Poincaré,  1854 ‐1912a)—hence the importance of Gauss' geodetic triangulation experiment. Gauss was aware that his three hills experiment was too small and thought on measurements on triangles formed with stars.

Poincaré vs. Einstein

Lobatschewsky's hyperbolic geometry did not remain the only non‐Euclidian geometry. Riemann developed a geometry without the parallel axiom, while the other Euclidian axioms were maintained with the exception of that of Order (Anordnung). Poincaré notes “so there is a kind of opposition between the geometries. For instance the sum of the angles in a triangle is equal to two right angles in Euclid's geometry, less than two right angles in that of Lobatschewsky, and greater than two right angles in that of Riemann. The number of parallel lines that can be drawn through a given point to a given line is one in Euclid's geometry, none in Riemann's, and an infinite number in the geometry of Lobatschewsky. Let us add that Riemann's space is finite, although unbounded.” As further distinction, the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle is equal to π in Euclid's, greater than π in Lobatschewsky's and smaller than π in Riemann's geometry. A further difference between these geometries concerns the degree of curvature (Krümmungsmass k) which is 0 for a Euclidian surface, smaller than 0 for a Lobatschewsky and greater than 0 for a Riemann surface. The difference in curvature can be roughly compared with plane, concave and convex surfaces. The inner geometric structure of a Riemann plane resembles the surface structure of a Euclidean sphere and a Lobatschewsky plane resembles that of a Euclidean pseudosphere (a negatively curved geometry of a saddle). What geometry is true? Poincaré asked “Ought we then, to conclude that the axioms of geometry are experimental truths?” and continues “If geometry were an experimental science, it would not be an exact science. The geometric axioms are therefore neither synthetic a priori intuitions as affirmed by Kant nor experimental facts. They are conventions. Our choice among all possible conventions is guided by experimental facts; but it remains free and is only limited by the necessity of avoiding contradictions. In other words, the axioms of geometry are only definitions in disguise. What then are we to think of the question: Is Euclidean geometry true? It has no meaning. One geometry cannot be more true than another, it can only be more convenient. Now, Euclidean geometry is, and will remain, the most convenient, 1 st because it is the simplest and 2 nd because it sufficiently agrees with the properties of natural bodies” (Poincaré,  1854 ‐1912a).

Poincaré's book was published in 1903 and only a few years later Einstein published his general theory of relativity ( 1916 ) where he used a non‐Euclidean, Riemann geometry and where he demonstrated a structure of space that deviated from Euclidean geometry in the vicinity of strong gravitational fields. And in 1919, astronomical observations during a solar eclipse showed that light rays from a distant star were indeed “bent” when passing next to the sun. These physical observations challenged the view of Poincaré, and we should now address some aspects of hypotheses in physics (Carnap,  1891 ‐1970b).

HYPOTHESES IN PHYSICS

The long life of the five elements hypothesis.

Physical sciences—not to speak of biological sciences — were less developed in antiquity than mathematics which is already demonstrated by the primitive ideas on the elements constituting physical bodies. Plato and Aristotle spoke of the four elements which they took over from Thales (water), Anaximenes (air) and Parmenides (fire and earth) and add a fifth element (quinta essentia, our quintessence), namely ether. Ether is imagined a heavenly element belonging to the supralunar world. In Plato's dialogue Timaios (Plato,  c.424‐c.348 BC a ), the five elements were associated with regular polyhedra in geometry and became known as Platonic bodies: tetrahedron (fire), octahedron (air), cube (earth), icosahedron (water) and dodecahedron (ether). In regular polyhedra, faces are congruent (identical in shape and size), all angles and all edges are congruent, and the same number of faces meet at each vertex. The number of elements is limited to five because in Euclidian space there are exactly five regular polyhedral. There is in Plato's writing even a kind of geometrical chemistry. Since two octahedra (air) plus one tetrahedron (fire) can be combined into one icosahedron (water), these “liquid” elements can combine while this is not the case for combinations with the cube (earth). The 12 faces of the dodecahedron were compared with the 12 zodiac signs (Mittelstrass,  1980e ). This geometry‐based hypothesis of physics had a long life. As late as 1612, Kepler in his Mysterium cosmographicum tried to fit the Platonic bodies into the planetary shells of his solar system model. The ether theory even survived into the scientific discussion of the 19th‐century physics and the idea of a mathematical structure of the universe dominated by symmetry operations even fertilized 20th‐century ideas about symmetry concepts in the physics of elementary particles.

Huygens on sound waves in air

The ether hypothesis figures prominently in the 1690 Treatise on Light from Huygens ( 1617‐1670 ). He first reports on the transmission of sound by air when writing “this may be proved by shutting up a sounding body in a glass vessel from which the air is withdrawn and care was taken to place the sounding body on cotton that it cannot communicate its tremor to the glass vessel which encloses it. After having exhausted all the air, one hears no sound from the metal though it is struck.” Huygens comes up with some foresight when suspecting “the air is of such a nature that it can be compressed and reduced to a much smaller space than that it normally occupies. Air is made up of small bodies which float about and which are agitated very rapidly. So that the spreading of sound is the effort which these little bodies make in collisions with one another, to regain freedom when they are a little more squeezed together in the circuit of these waves than elsewhere.”

Huygens on light waves in ether

“That is not the same air but another kind of matter in which light spreads; since if the air is removed from the vessel the light does not cease to traverse it as before. The extreme velocity of light cannot admit such a propagation of motion” as sound waves. To achieve the propagation of light, Huygens invokes ether “as a substance approaching to perfect hardness and possessing springiness as prompt as we choose. One may conceive light to spread successively by spherical waves. The propagation consists nowise in the transport of those particles but merely in a small agitation which they cannot help communicate to those surrounding.” The hypothesis of an ether in outer space fills libraries of physical discussions, but all experimental approaches led to contradictions with respect to postulated properties of this hypothetical material for example when optical experiments showed that light waves display transversal and not longitudinal oscillations.

The demise of ether

Mechanical models for the transmission of light or gravitation waves requiring ether were finally put to rest by the theory of relativity from Einstein (Mittelstrass,  1980f ). This theory posits that the speed of light in an empty space is constant and does not depend on movements of the source of light or that of an observer as requested by the ether hypothesis. The theory of relativity also provides an answer how the force of gravitation is transmitted from one mass to another across an essentially empty space. In the non‐Euclidian formulation of the theory of relativity (Einstein used the Riemann geometry), there is no gravitation force in the sense of mechanical or electromagnetic forces. The gravitation force is in this formulation simply replaced by a geometric structure (space curvature near high and dense masses) of a four‐dimensional space–time system (Carnap,  1891 ‐1970c; Einstein & Imfeld,  1956 ) Gravitation waves and gravitation lens effects have indeed been experimental demonstrated by astrophysicists (Dorfmüller et al.,  1998 ).

For Aristotle's on physical hypotheses , see Appendix  S3 .

PHILOSOPHICAL THOUGHTS ON HYPOTHESES

In the following, the opinions of a number of famous scientists and philosophers on hypotheses are quoted to provide a historical overview on the subject.

Copernicus' hypothesis: a calculus which fits observations

In his book Revolutions of Heavenly Spheres Copernicus ( 1473–1543 ) reasoned in the preface about hypotheses in physics. “Since the newness of the hypotheses of this work ‐which sets the earth in motion and puts an immovable sun at the center of the universe‐ has already received a great deal of publicity, I have no doubt that certain of the savants have taken great offense.” He defended his heliocentric thesis by stating “For it is the job of the astronomer to use painstaking and skilled observations in gathering together the history of the celestial movements‐ and then – since he cannot by any line of reasoning reach the true causes of these movements‐ to think up or construct whatever causes or hypotheses he pleases such that, by the assumption of these causes, those same movements can be calculated from the principles of geometry for the past and the future too. This artist is markedly outstanding in both of these respects: for it is not necessary that these hypotheses should be true, or even probable; but it is enough if they provide a calculus which fits the observations.” This preface written in 1543 sounds in its arguments very modern physics. However, historians of science have discovered that it was probably written by a theologian friend of Copernicus to defend the book against the criticism by the church.

Bacon's intermediate hypotheses

In his book Novum Organum , Francis Bacon ( 1561–1626 ) claims for hypotheses and scientific reasoning “that they augur well for the sciences, when the ascent shall proceed by a true scale and successive steps, without interruption or breach, from particulars to the lesser axioms, thence to the intermediates and lastly to the most general.” He then notes “that the lowest axioms differ but little from bare experiments, the highest and most general are notional, abstract, and of no real weight. The intermediate are true, solid, full of life, and up to them depend the business and fortune of mankind.” He warns that “we must not then add wings, but rather lead and ballast to the understanding, to prevent its jumping and flying, which has not yet been done; but whenever this takes place we may entertain greater hopes of the sciences.” With respect to methodology, Bacon claims that “we must invent a different form of induction. The induction which proceeds by simple enumeration is puerile, leads to uncertain conclusions, …deciding generally from too small a number of facts. Sciences should separate nature by proper rejections and exclusions and then conclude for the affirmative, after collecting a sufficient number of negatives.”

Gilbert and Descartes for plausible hypotheses

William Gilbert introduced in his book On the Loadstone (Gilbert,  1544‐1603 ) the argument of plausibility into physical hypothesis building. “From these arguments, therefore, we infer not with mere probability, but with certainty, the diurnal rotation of the earth; for nature ever acts with fewer than with many means; and because it is more accordant to reason that the one small body, the earth, should make a daily revolution than the whole universe should be whirled around it.”

Descartes ( 1596‐1650 ) reflected on the sources of understanding in his book Rules for Direction and distinguished what “comes about by impulse, by conjecture, or by deduction. Impulse can assign no reason for their belief and when determined by fanciful disposition, it is almost always a source of error.” When speaking about the working of conjectures he quotes thoughts of Aristotle: “water which is at a greater distance from the center of the globe than earth is likewise less dense substance, and likewise the air which is above the water, is still rarer. Hence, we hazard the guess that above the air nothing exists but a very pure ether which is much rarer than air itself. Moreover nothing that we construct in this way really deceives, if we merely judge it to be probable and never affirm it to be true; in fact it makes us better instructed. Deduction is thus left to us as the only means of putting things together so as to be sure of their truth. Yet in it, too, there may be many defects.”

Care in formulating hypotheses

Locke ( 1632‐1704 ) in his treatise Concerning Human Understanding admits that “we may make use of any probable hypotheses whatsoever. Hypotheses if they are well made are at least great helps to the memory and often direct us to new discoveries. However, we should not take up any one too hastily.” Also, practising scientists argued against careless use of hypotheses and proposed remedies. Lavoisier ( 1743‐1794 ) in the preface to his Element of Chemistry warned about beaten‐track hypotheses. “Instead of applying observation to the things we wished to know, we have chosen rather to imagine them. Advancing from one ill‐founded supposition to another, we have at last bewildered ourselves amidst a multitude of errors. These errors becoming prejudices, are adopted as principles and we thus bewilder ourselves more and more. We abuse words which we do not understand. There is but one remedy: this is to forget all that we have learned, to trace back our ideas to their sources and as Bacon says to frame the human understanding anew.”

Faraday ( 1791–1867 ) in a Speculation Touching Electric Conduction and the Nature of Matter highlighted the fundamental difference between hypotheses and facts when noting “that he has most power of penetrating the secrets of nature, and guessing by hypothesis at her mode of working, will also be most careful for his own safe progress and that of others, to distinguish that knowledge which consists of assumption, by which I mean theory and hypothesis, from that which is the knowledge of facts and laws; never raising the former to the dignity or authority of the latter.”

Explicatory power justifies hypotheses

Darwin ( 1809 –1882a) defended the conclusions and hypothesis of his book The Origin of Species “that species have been modified in a long course of descent. This has been affected chiefly through the natural selection of numerous, slight, favorable variations.” He uses a post hoc argument for this hypothesis: “It can hardly be supposed that a false theory would explain, to so satisfactory a manner as does the theory of natural selection, the several large classes of facts” described in his book.

The natural selection of hypotheses

In the concluding chapter of The Descent of Man Darwin ( 1809 –1882b) admits “that many of the views which have been advanced in this book are highly speculative and some no doubt will prove erroneous.” However, he distinguished that “false facts are highly injurious to the progress of science for they often endure long; but false views do little harm for everyone takes a salutory pleasure in proving their falseness; and when this is done, one path to error is closed and the road to truth is often at the same time opened.”

The American philosopher William James ( 1842–1907 ) concurred with Darwin's view when he wrote in his Principles of Psychology “every scientific conception is in the first instance a spontaneous variation in someone'’s brain. For one that proves useful and applicable there are a thousand that perish through their worthlessness. The scientific conceptions must prove their worth by being verified. This test, however, is the cause of their preservation, not of their production.”

The American philosopher J. Dewey ( 1859‐1952 ) in his treatise Experience and Education notes that “the experimental method of science attaches more importance not less to ideas than do other methods. There is no such thing as experiment in the scientific sense unless action is directed by some leading idea. The fact that the ideas employed are hypotheses, not final truths, is the reason why ideas are more jealously guarded and tested in science than anywhere else. As fixed truths they must be accepted and that is the end of the matter. But as hypotheses, they must be continuously tested and revised, a requirement that demands they be accurately formulated. Ideas or hypotheses are tested by the consequences which they produce when they are acted upon. The method of intelligence manifested in the experimental method demands keeping track of ideas, activities, and observed consequences. Keeping track is a matter of reflective review.”

The reductionist principle

James ( 1842‐1907 ) pushed this idea further when saying “Scientific thought goes by selection. We break the solid plenitude of fact into separate essences, conceive generally what only exists particularly, and by our classifications leave nothing in its natural neighborhood. The reality exists as a plenum. All its part are contemporaneous, but we can neither experience nor think this plenum. What we experience is a chaos of fragmentary impressions, what we think is an abstract system of hypothetical data and laws. We must decompose each chaos into single facts. We must learn to see in the chaotic antecedent a multitude of distinct antecedents, in the chaotic consequent a multitude of distinct consequents.” From these considerations James concluded “even those experiences which are used to prove a scientific truth are for the most part artificial experiences of the laboratory gained after the truth itself has been conjectured. Instead of experiences engendering the inner relations, the inner relations are what engender the experience here.“

Following curiosity

Freud ( 1856–1939 ) considered curiosity and imagination as driving forces of hypothesis building which need to be confronted as quickly as possible with observations. In Beyond the Pleasure Principle , Freud wrote “One may surely give oneself up to a line of thought and follow it up as far as it leads, simply out of scientific curiosity. These innovations were direct translations of observation into theory, subject to no greater sources of error than is inevitable in anything of the kind. At all events there is no way of working out this idea except by combining facts with pure imagination and thereby departing far from observation.” This can quickly go astray when trusting intuition. Freud recommends “that one may inexorably reject theories that are contradicted by the very first steps in the analysis of observation and be aware that those one holds have only a tentative validity.”

Feed‐forward aspects of hypotheses

The geneticist Waddington ( 1905–1975 ) in his essay The Nature of Life states that “a scientific theory cannot remain a mere structure within the world of logic, but must have implications for action and that in two rather different ways. It must involve the consequence that if you do so and so, such and such result will follow. That is to say it must give, or at least offer, the possibility of controlling the process. Secondly, its value is quite largely dependent on its power of suggesting the next step in scientific advance. Any complete piece of scientific work starts with an activity essentially the same as that of an artist. It starts by asking a relevant question. The first step may be a new awareness of some facet of the world that no one else had previously thought worth attending to. Or some new imaginative idea which depends on a sensitive receptiveness to the oddity of nature essentially similar to that of the artist. In his logical analysis and manipulative experimentation, the scientist is behaving arrogantly towards nature, trying to force her into his categories of thought or to trick her into doing what he wants. But finally he has to be humble. He has to take his intuition, his logical theory and his manipulative skill to the bar of Nature and see whether she answers yes or no; and he has to abide by the result. Science is often quite ready to tolerate some logical inadequacy in a theory‐or even a flat logical contradiction like that between the particle and wave theories of matter‐so long as it finds itself in the possession of a hypothesis which offers both the possibility of control and a guide to worthwhile avenues of exploration.”

Poincaré: the dialogue between experiment and hypothesis

Poincaré ( 1854 –1912b) also dealt with physics in Science and Hypothesis . “Experiment is the sole source of truth. It alone can teach us certainty. Cannot we be content with experiment alone? What place is left for mathematical physics? The man of science must work with method. Science is built up of facts, as a house is built of stones, but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a heap of stones is a house. It is often said that experiments should be made without preconceived concepts. That is impossible. Without the hypothesis, no conclusion could have been drawn; nothing extraordinary would have been seen; and only one fact the more would have been catalogued, without deducing from it the remotest consequence.” Poincaré compares science to a library. Experimental physics alone can enrich the library with new books, but mathematical theoretical physics draw up the catalogue to find the books and to reveal gaps which have to be closed by the purchase of new books.

Poincaré: false, true, fruitful and dangerous hypotheses

Poincaré continues “we all know that there are good and bad experiments. The latter accumulate in vain. Whether there are hundred or thousand, one single piece of work will be sufficient to sweep them into oblivion. Bacon invented the term of an experimentum crucis for such experiments. What then is a good experiment? It is that which teaches us something more than an isolated fact. It is that which enables us to predict and to generalize. Experiments only gives us a certain number of isolated points. They must be connected by a continuous line and that is true generalization. Every generalization is a hypothesis. It should be as soon as possible submitted to verification. If it cannot stand the test, it must be abandoned without any hesitation. The physicist who has just given up one of his hypotheses should rejoice, for he found an unexpected opportunity of discovery. The hypothesis took into account all the known factors which seem capable of intervention in the phenomenon. If it is not verified, it is because there is something unexpected. Has the hypothesis thus rejected been sterile? Far from it. It has rendered more service than a true hypothesis.” Poincaré notes that “with a true hypothesis only one fact the more would have been catalogued, without deducing from it the remotest consequence. It may be said that the wrong hypothesis has rendered more service than a true hypothesis.” However, Poincaré warns that “some hypotheses are dangerous – first and foremost those which are tacit and unconscious. And since we make them without knowing them, we cannot get rid of them.” Poincaré notes that here mathematical physics is of help because by its precision one is compelled to formulate all the hypotheses, revealing also the tacit ones.

Arguments for the reductionist principle

Poincaré also warned against multiplying hypotheses indefinitely: “If we construct a theory upon multiple hypotheses, and if experiment condemns it, which of the premisses must be changed?” Poincaré also recommended to “resolve the complex phenomenon given directly by experiment into a very large number of elementary phenomena. First, with respect to time. Instead of embracing in its entirety the progressive development of a phenomenon, we simply try to connect each moment with the one immediately preceding. Next, we try to decompose the phenomenon in space. We must try to deduce the elementary phenomenon localized in a very small region of space.” Poincaré suggested that the physicist should “be guided by the instinct of simplicity, and that is why in physical science generalization so readily takes the mathematical form to state the problem in the form of an equation.” This argument goes back to Galilei ( 1564 –1642b) who wrote in The Two Sciences “when I observe a stone initially at rest falling from an elevated position and continually acquiring new increments of speed, why should I not believe that such increases take place in a manner which is exceedingly simple and rather obvious to everybody? If now we examine the matter carefully we find no addition or increment more simple than that which repeats itself always in the same manner. It seems we shall not be far wrong if we put the increment of speed as proportional to the increment of time.” With a bit of geometrical reasoning, Galilei deduced that the distance travelled by a freely falling body varies as the square of the time. However, Galilei was not naïve and continued “I grant that these conclusions proved in the abstract will be different when applied in the concrete” and considers disturbances cause by friction and air resistance that complicate the initially conceived simplicity.

Four sequential steps of discovery…

Some philosophers of science attributed a fundamental importance to observations for the acquisition of experience in science. The process starts with accidental observations (Aristotle), going to systematic observations (Bacon), leading to quantitative rules obtained with exact measurements (Newton and Kant) and culminating in observations under artificially created conditions in experiments (Galilei) (Mittelstrass,  1980g ).

…rejected by Popper and Kant

In fact, Newton wrote that he had developed his theory of gravitation from experience followed by induction. K. Popper ( 1902‐1994 ) in his book Conjectures and Refutations did not agree with this logical flow “experience leading to theory” and that for several reasons. This scheme is according to Popper intuitively false because observations are always inexact, while theory makes absolute exact assertions. It is also historically false because Copernicus and Kepler were not led to their theories by experimental observations but by geometry and number theories of Plato and Pythagoras for which they searched verifications in observational data. Kepler, for example, tried to prove the concept of circular planetary movement influenced by Greek theory of the circle being a perfect geometric figure and only when he could not demonstrate this with observational data, he tried elliptical movements. Popper noted that it was Kant who realized that even physical experiments are not prior to theories when quoting Kant's preface to the Critique of Pure Reason : “When Galilei let his globes run down an inclined plane with a gravity which he has chosen himself, then a light dawned on all natural philosophers. They learnt that our reason can only understand what it creates according to its own design; that we must compel Nature to answer our questions, rather than cling to Nature's apron strings and allow her to guide us. For purely accidental observations, made without any plan having been thought out in advance, cannot be connected by a law‐ which is what reason is searching for.” From that reasoning Popper concluded that “we ourselves must confront nature with hypotheses and demand a reply to our questions; and that lacking such hypotheses, we can only make haphazard observations which follow no plan and which can therefore never lead to a natural law. Everyday experience, too, goes far beyond all observations. Everyday experience must interpret observations for without theoretical interpretation, observations remain blind and uninformative. Everyday experience constantly operates with abstract ideas, such as that of cause and effect, and so it cannot be derived from observation.” Popper agreed with Kant who said “Our intellect does not draw its laws from nature…but imposes them on nature”. Popper modifies this statement to “Our intellect does not draw its laws from nature, but tries‐ with varying degrees of success – to impose upon nature laws which it freely invents. Theories are seen to be free creations of our mind, the result of almost poetic intuition. While theories cannot be logically derived from observations, they can, however, clash with observations. This fact makes it possible to infer from observations that a theory is false. The possibility of refuting theories by observations is the basis of all empirical tests. All empirical tests are therefore attempted refutations.”

OUTLOOK: HYPOTHESES IN BIOLOGY

Is biology special.

Waddington notes that “living organisms are much more complicated than the non‐living things. Biology has therefore developed more slowly than sciences such as physics and chemistry and has tended to rely on them for many of its basic ideas. These older physical sciences have provided biology with many firm foundations which have been of the greatest value to it, but throughout most of its history biology has found itself faced with the dilemma as to how far its reliance on physics and chemistry should be pushed” both with respect to its experimental methods and its theoretical foundations. Vitalism is indeed such a theory maintaining that organisms cannot be explained solely by physicochemical laws claiming specific biological forces active in organisms. However, efforts to prove the existence of such vital forces have failed and today most biologists consider vitalism a superseded theory.

Biology as a branch of science is as old as physics. If one takes Aristotle as a reference, he has written more on biology than on physics. Sophisticated animal experiments were already conducted in the antiquity by Galen (Brüssow, 2022 ). Alertus Magnus displayed biological research interest during the medieval time. Knowledge on plants provided the basis of medical drugs in early modern times. What explains biology's decreasing influence compared with the rapid development of physics by Galilei and Newton? One reason is the possibility to use mathematical equations to describe physical phenomena which was not possible for biological phenomena. Physics has from the beginning displayed a trend to few fundamental underlying principles. This is not the case for biology. With the discovery of new continents, biologists were fascinated by the diversity of life. Diversity was the conducting line of biological thinking. This changed only when taxonomists and comparative anatomists revealed recurring pattern in this stunning biological variety and when Darwin provided a theoretical concept to understand variation as a driving force in biology. Even when genetics and molecular biology allowed to understand biology from a few universally shared properties, such as a universal genetic code, biology differed in fundamental aspects from physics and chemistry. First, biology is so far restricted to the planet earth while the laws of physic and chemistry apply in principle to the entire universe. Second, biology is to a great extent a historical discipline; many biological processes cannot be understood from present‐day observations because they are the result of historical developments in evolution. Hence, the importance of Dobzhansky's dictum that nothing makes sense in biology except in the light of evolution. The great diversity of life forms, the complexity of processes occurring in cells and their integration in higher organisms and the importance of a historical past for the understanding of extant organisms, all that has delayed the successful application of mathematical methods in biology or the construction of theoretical frameworks in biology. Theoretical biology by far did not achieve a comparable role as theoretical physics which is on equal foot with experimental physics. Many biologists are even rather sceptical towards a theoretical biology and see progress in the development of ever more sophisticated experimental methods instead in theoretical concepts expressed by new hypotheses.

Knowledge from data without hypothesis?

Philosophers distinguish rational knowledge ( cognitio ex principiis ) from knowledge from data ( cognitio ex data ). Kant associates these two branches with natural sciences and natural history, respectively. The latter with descriptions of natural objects as prominently done with systematic classification of animals and plants or, where it is really history, when describing events in the evolution of life forms on earth. Cognitio ex data thus played a much more prominent role in biology than in physics and explains why the compilation of data and in extremis the collection of museum specimen characterizes biological research. To account for this difference, philosophers of the logical empiricism developed a two‐level concept of science languages consisting of a language of observations (Beobachtungssprache) and a language of theories (Theoriesprache) which are linked by certain rules of correspondence (Korrespondenzregeln) (Carnap,  1891 –1970d). If one looks into leading biological research journals, it becomes clear that biology has a sophisticated language of observation and a much less developed language of theories.

Do we need more philosophical thinking in biology or at least a more vigorous theoretical biology? The breathtaking speed of progress in experimental biology seems to indicate that biology can well develop without much theoretical or philosophical thinking. At the same time, one could argue that some fields in biology might need more theoretical rigour. Microbiologists might think on microbiome research—one of the breakthrough developments of microbiology research in recent years. The field teems with fascinating, but ill‐defined terms (our second genome; holobionts; gut–brain axis; dysbiosis, symbionts; probiotics; health benefits) that call for stricter definitions. One might also argue that biologists should at least consider the criticism of Goethe ( 1749–1832 ), a poet who was also an active scientist. In Faust , the devil ironically teaches biology to a young student.

“Wer will was Lebendigs erkennen und beschreiben, Sucht erst den Geist herauszutreiben, Dann hat er die Teile in seiner Hand, Fehlt, leider! nur das geistige Band.” (To docket living things past any doubt. You cancel first the living spirit out: The parts lie in the hollow of your hand, You only lack the living thing you banned).

We probably need both in biology: more data and more theory and hypotheses.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author reports no conflict of interest.

FUNDING INFORMATION

No funding information provided.

Supporting information

Appendix S1

Brüssow, H. (2022) On the role of hypotheses in science . Microbial Biotechnology , 15 , 2687–2698. Available from: 10.1111/1751-7915.14141 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• Bacon, F. (1561. –1626) Novum Organum. In: Adler, M.J. (Ed.) (editor‐in‐chief) Great books of the western world . Chicago, IL: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. 2nd edition 1992 vol 1–60 (abbreviated below as GBWW) here: GBWW vol. 28: 128. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brüssow, H. (2022) What is Truth – in science and beyond . Environmental Microbiology , 24 , 2895–2906. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carnap, R. (1891. ‐1970a) Philosophical foundations of physics. Ch. 14 . Basic Books, Inc., New York, 1969. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carnap, R. (1891. ‐1970b) Philosophical foundations of physics. Ch. 15 . Basic Books, Inc., New York, 1969. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carnap, R. (1891. ‐1970c) Philosophical foundations of physics. Ch. 16 . Basic Books, Inc., New York, 1969. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carnap, R. (1891. ‐1970d) Philosophical foundations of physics. Ch. 27–28 . Basic Books, Inc., New York, 1969. [ Google Scholar ]
• Copernicus . (1473. ‐1543) Revolutions of heavenly spheres . GBWW , vol. 15 , 505–506. [ Google Scholar ]
• Darwin, C. (1809. ‐1882a) The origin of species . GBWW , vol. 49 : 239. [ Google Scholar ]
• Darwin, C. (1809. ‐1882b) The descent of man . GBWW , vol. 49 : 590. [ Google Scholar ]
• Descartes, R. (1596. ‐1650) Rules for direction . GBWW , vol. 28 , 245. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dewey, J. (1859. –1952) Experience and education . GBWW , vol. 55 , 124. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dorfmüller, T. , Hering, W.T. & Stierstadt, K. (1998) Bergmann Schäfer Lehrbuch der Experimentalphysik: Band 1 Mechanik, Relativität, Wärme. In: Was ist Schwerkraft: Von Newton zu Einstein . Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 197–203. [ Google Scholar ]
• Einstein, A. (1916) Relativity . GBWW , vol. 56 , 191–243. [ Google Scholar ]
• Einstein, A. & Imfeld, L. (1956) Die Evolution der Physik . Hamburg: Rowohlts deutsche Enzyklopädie, Rowohlt Verlag. [ Google Scholar ]
• Euclid . (c.323‐c.283) The elements . GBWW , vol. 10 , 1–2. [ Google Scholar ]
• Faraday, M. (1791. –1867) Speculation touching electric conduction and the nature of matter . GBWW , 42 , 758–763. [ Google Scholar ]
• Freud, S. (1856. –1939) Beyond the pleasure principle . GBWW , vol. 54 , 661–662. [ Google Scholar ]
• Galilei, G. (1564. ‐1642a) The Assayer, as translated by S. Drake (1957) Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo pp. 237–8 abridged pdf at Stanford University .
• Galilei, G. (1564. ‐1642b) The two sciences . GBWW vol. 26 : 200. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gilbert, W. (1544. ‐1603) On the Loadstone . GBWW , vol. 26 , 108–110. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goethe, J.W. (1749. –1832) Faust . GBWW , vol. 45 , 20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hilbert, D. (1899) Grundlagen der Geometrie . Leipzig, Germany: Verlag Teubner. [ Google Scholar ]
• Huygens, C. (1617. ‐1670) Treatise on light . GBWW , vol. 32 , 557–560. [ Google Scholar ]
• James, W. (1842. –1907) Principles of psychology . GBWW , vol. 53 , 862–866. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kant, I. (1724. –1804) Critique of pure reason . GBWW , vol. 39 , 227–230. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lavoisier, A.L. (1743. ‐1794) Element of chemistry . GBWW , vol. 42 , p. 2, 6‐7, 9‐10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Locke, J. (1632. ‐1704) Concerning Human Understanding . GBWW , vol. 33 , 317–362. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mittelstrass, J. (1980a) Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie Bibliographisches Institut Mannheim, Wien, Zürich B.I. Wissenschaftsverlag Vol. 1: 239–241 .
• Mittelstrass, J. (1980b) Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie Bibliographisches Institut Mannheim, Wien, Zürich B.I. Wissenschaftsverlag Vol. 3: 307 .
• Mittelstrass, J. (1980c) Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie Bibliographisches Institut Mannheim, Wien, Zürich B.I. Wissenschaftsverlag Vol. 1: 439–442 .
• Mittelstrass, J. (1980d) Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie Bibliographisches Institut Mannheim, Wien, Zürich B.I. Wissenschaftsverlag Vol. 2: 157–158 .
• Mittelstrass, J. (1980e) Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie Bibliographisches Institut Mannheim, Wien, Zürich B.I. Wissenschaftsverlag Vol. 3: 264‐267, 449.450 .
• Mittelstrass, J. (1980f) Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie Bibliographisches Institut Mannheim, Wien, Zürich B.I. Wissenschaftsverlag Vol. 1: 209–210 .
• Mittelstrass, J. (1980g) Enzyklopädie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie Bibliographisches Institut Mannheim, Wien, Zürich B.I. Wissenschaftsverlag Vol. 1: 281–282 .
• Pascal, B. (1623. ‐1662a) Pensées GBWW vol. 30 : 171–173. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pascal, B. (1623. ‐1662b) Scientific treatises on geometric demonstrations . GBWW vol. 30 : 442–443. [ Google Scholar ]
• Plato . (c.424‐c.348 BC a) Timaeus . GBWW , vol. 6 , 442–477. [ Google Scholar ]
• Poincaré, H. (1854. ‐1912a) Science and hypothesis GBWW , vol. 56 : XV‐XVI, 1–5, 10–15 [ Google Scholar ]
• Poincaré, H. (1854. ‐1912b) Science and hypothesis GBWW , vol. 56 : 40–52. [ Google Scholar ]
• Popper, K. (1902. ‐1994) Conjectures and refutations . London and New York, 2002: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge Routledge Classics, pp. 249–261. [ Google Scholar ]
• Syntopicon . (1992) Hypothesis . GBWW , vol. 1 , 576–587. [ Google Scholar ]
• Waddington, C.H. (1905. –1975) The nature of life . GBWW , vol. 56 , 697–699. [ Google Scholar ]