different types of hypothesis psychology

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

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Data Interpretation – Process, Methods and...

Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and...

Thesis Statement – Examples, Writing Guide

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Ethical Considerations – Types, Examples and...

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

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.

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)

2.4 Developing a Hypothesis

Learning objectives.

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

Theories and Hypotheses

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

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

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

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

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

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

Theory Testing

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

Figure 4.4 Hypothetico-Deductive Method Combined With the General Model of Scientific Research in Psychology Together they form a model of theoretically motivated research.

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

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

Incorporating Theory into Your Research

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

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

Characteristics of a Good Hypothesis

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

Key Takeaways

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

Share This Book

Increase Font Size

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

Overview of the Scientific Method

10 Developing a Hypothesis

Learning objectives.

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

Theories and Hypotheses

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

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

Theory Testing

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

different types of hypothesis psychology

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

Incorporating Theory into Your Research

Characteristics of a Good Hypothesis

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

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

A coherent explanation or interpretation of one or more phenomena.

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

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

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

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

Share This Book

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

3 Chapter 3: From Theory to Hypothesis

From theory to hypothesis, 3.1 phenomena and theories.

A phenomenon (plural, phenomena) is a general result that has been observed reliably in systematic empirical research. In essence, it is an established answer to a research question. Some phenomena we have encountered in this book are that expressive writing improves health, women do not talk more than men, and cell phone usage impairs driving ability. Some others are that dissociative identity disorder (formerly called multiple personality disorder) increased greatly in prevalence during the late 20th century, people perform better on easy tasks when they are being watched by others (and worse on difficult tasks), and people recall items presented at the beginning and end of a list better than items presented in the middle.

Some Famous Psychological Phenomena

Phenomena are often given names by their discoverers or other researchers, and these names can catch on and become widely known. The following list is a small sample of famous phenomena in psychology.

· Blindsight. People with damage to their visual cortex are often able to respond to visual stimuli that they do not consciously see.

· Bystander effect. The more people who are present at an emergency situation, the less likely it is that any one of them will help.

· Fundamental attribution error. People tend to explain others’ behavior in terms of their personal characteristics as opposed to the situation they are in.

· McGurk effect. When audio of a basic speech sound is combined with video of a person making mouth movements for a different speech sound, people often perceive a sound that is intermediate between the two.

· Own-race effect. People recognize faces of people of their own race more accurately than faces of people of other races.

· Placebo effect. Placebos (fake psychological or medical treatments) often lead to improvements in people’s symptoms and functioning.

· Mere exposure effect. The more often people have been exposed to a stimulus, the more they like it—even when the stimulus is presented subliminally.

· Serial position effect. Stimuli presented near the beginning and end of a list are remembered better than stimuli presented in the middle.

· Spontaneous recovery. A conditioned response that has been extinguished often returns with no further training after the passage of time.

Although an empirical result might be referred to as a phenomenon after being observed only once, this term is more likely to be used for results that have been replicated. Replication means conducting a study again—either exactly as it was originally conducted or with modifications—to be sure that it produces the same results. Individual researchers usually replicate their own studies before publishing them. Many empirical research reports include an initial study and then one or more follow-up studies that replicate the initial study with minor modifications. Particularly interesting results come to the attention of other researchers who conduct their own replications. The positive effect of expressive writing on health and the negative effect of cell phone usage on driving ability are examples of phenomena that have been replicated many times by many different researchers.

Sometimes a replication of a study produces results that differ from the results of the initial study. This could mean that the results of the initial study or the results of the replication were a fluke—they occurred by chance and do not reflect something that is generally true. In either case, additional replications would be likely to resolve this. A failure to produce the same results could also mean that the replication differed in some important way from the initial study. For example, early studies showed that people performed a variety of tasks better and faster when they were watched by others than when they were alone. Some later replications, however, showed that people performed worse when they were watched by others. Eventually researcher Robert Zajonc identified a key difference between the two types of studies. People seemed to perform better when being watched on highly practiced tasks but worse when being watched on relatively unpracticed tasks (Zajonc, 1965). These two phenomena have now come to be called social facilitation and social inhibition.

What Is a Theory?

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

In addition to theory, researchers in psychology use several related terms to refer to their explanations and interpretations of phenomena. A perspective is a broad approach—more general than a theory—to explaining and interpreting phenomena. For example, researchers who take a biological perspective tend to explain phenomena in terms of genetics or nervous and endocrine system structures and processes, while researchers who take a behavioral perspective tend to explain phenomena in terms of reinforcement, punishment, and other external events. A model is a precise explanation or interpretation of a specific phenomenon—often expressed in terms of equations, computer programs, or biological structures and processes. A hypothesis can be an explanation that relies on just a few key concepts—although this term more commonly refers to a prediction about a new phenomenon based on a theory. Adding to the confusion is the fact that researchers often use these terms interchangeably. It would not be considered wrong to refer to the drive theory as the drive model or even the drive hypothesis. And the biopsychosocial model of health psychology—the general idea that health is determined by an interaction of biological, psychological, and social factors—is really more like a perspective as defined here. Keep in mind, however, that the most important distinction remains that between observations and interpretations.

What Are Theories For?

Of course, scientific theories are meant to provide accurate explanations or interpretations of phenomena. But there must be more to it than this. Consider that a theory can be accurate without being very useful. To say that expressive writing helps people “deal with their emotions” might be accurate as far as it goes, but it seems too vague to be of much use. Consider also that a theory can be useful without being entirely accurate.

3.2 Additional Purposes of Theories

Here we look at three additional purposes of theories: the organization of known phenomena, the prediction of outcomes in new situations, and the generation of new research.

Organization

One important purpose of scientific theories is to organize phenomena in ways that help people think about them clearly and efficiently. The drive theory of social facilitation and social inhibition, for example, helps to organize and make sense of a large number of seemingly contradictory results. The multistore model of human memory efficiently summarizes many important phenomena: the limited capacity and short retention time of information that is attended to but not rehearsed, the importance of rehearsing information for long-term retention, the serial-position effect, and so on.

Thus theories are good or useful to the extent that they organize more phenomena with greater clarity and efficiency. Scientists generally follow the principle of parsimony, which holds that a theory should include only as many concepts as are necessary to explain or interpret the phenomena of interest. Simpler, more parsimonious theories organize phenomena more efficiently than more complex, less parsimonious theories.

A second purpose of theories is to allow researchers and others to make predictions about what will happen in new situations. For example, a gymnastics coach might wonder whether a student’s performance is likely to be better or worse during a competition than when practicing alone. Even if this particular question has never been studied empirically, Zajonc’s drive theory suggests an answer. If the student generally performs with no mistakes, she is likely to perform better during competition. If she generally performs with many mistakes, she is likely to perform worse.

In clinical psychology, treatment decisions are often guided by theories. Consider, for example, dissociative identity disorder (formerly called multiple personality disorder). The prevailing scientific theory of dissociative identity disorder is that people develop multiple personalities (also called alters) because they are familiar with this idea from popular portrayals (e.g., the movie Sybil) and because they are unintentionally encouraged to do so by their clinicians (e.g., by asking to “meet” an alter). This theory implies that rather than encouraging patients to act out multiple personalities, treatment should involve discouraging them from doing this (Lilienfeld & Lynn, 2003).

Generation of New Research

A third purpose of theories is to generate new research by raising new questions. Consider, for example, the theory that people engage in self-injurious behavior such as cutting because it reduces negative emotions such as sadness, anxiety, and anger. This theory immediately suggests several new and interesting questions. Is there, in fact, a statistical relationship between cutting and the amount of negative emotions experienced? Is it causal? If so, what is it about cutting that has this effect? Is it the pain, the sight of the injury, or something else? Does cutting affect all negative emotions equally?

Notice that a theory does not have to be accurate to serve this purpose. Even an inaccurate theory can generate new and interesting research questions. Of course, if the theory is inaccurate, the answers to the new questions will tend to be inconsistent with the theory. This will lead researchers to reevaluate the theory and either revise it or abandon it for a new one. And this is how scientific theories become more detailed and accurate over time.

Multiple Theories

At any point in time, researchers are usually considering multiple theories for any set of phenomena. One reason is that because human behavior is extremely complex, it is always possible to look at it from different perspectives. For example, a biological theory of sexual orientation might focus on the role of sex hormones during critical periods of brain development, while a sociocultural theory might focus on cultural factors that influence how underlying biological tendencies are expressed. A second reason is that—even from the same perspective—there are usually different ways to “go beyond” the phenomena of interest. For example, in addition to the drive theory of social facilitation and social inhibition, there is another theory that explains them in terms of a construct called “evaluation apprehension”—anxiety about being evaluated by the audience. Both theories go beyond the phenomena to be interpreted, but they do so by proposing somewhat different underlying processes.

Different theories of the same set of phenomena can be complementary—with each one supplying one piece of a larger puzzle. A biological theory of sexual orientation and a sociocultural theory of sexual orientation might accurately describe different aspects of the same complex phenomenon. Similarly, social facilitation could be the result of both general physiological arousal and evaluation apprehension. But different theories of the same phenomena can also be competing in the sense that if one is accurate, the other is probably not. For example, an alternative theory of dissociative identity disorder—the posttraumatic theory—holds that alters are created unconsciously by the patient as a means of coping with sexual abuse or some other traumatic experience. Because the sociocognitive theory and the posttraumatic theories attribute dissociative identity disorder to fundamentally different processes, it seems unlikely that both can be accurate.

The fact that there are multiple theories for any set of phenomena does not mean that any theory is as good as any other or that it is impossible to know whether a theory provides an accurate explanation or interpretation. On the contrary, scientists are continually comparing theories in terms of their ability to organize phenomena, predict outcomes in new situations, and generate research. Those that fare poorly are assumed to be less accurate and are abandoned, while those that fare well are assumed to be more accurate and are retained and compared with newer—and hopefully better—theories. Although scientists generally do not believe that their theories ever provide perfectly accurate descriptions of the world, they do assume that this process produces theories that come closer and closer to that ideal.

Key Takeaways

· Scientists distinguish between phenomena, which are their systematic observations, and theories, which are their explanations or interpretations of phenomena.

· In addition to providing accurate explanations or interpretations, scientific theories have three basic purposes. They organize phenomena, allow people to predict what will happen in new situations, and help generate new research.

· Researchers generally consider multiple theories for any set of phenomena. Different theories of the same set of phenomena can be complementary or competing.

3.3 Using Theories in Psychological Research

We have now seen what theories are, what they are for, and the variety of forms that they take in psychological research. In this section we look more closely at how researchers actually use them. We begin with a general description of how researchers test and revise their theories, and we end with some practical advice for beginning researchers who want to incorporate theory into their research.

Theory Testing and Revision

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

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

Constructing or Choosing a Theory

Along with generating research questions, constructing theories is one of the more creative parts of scientific research. But as with all creative activities, success requires preparation and hard work more than anything else. To construct a good theory, a researcher must know in detail about the phenomena of interest and about any existing theories based on a thorough review of the literature. The new theory must provide a coherent explanation or interpretation of the phenomena of interest and have some advantage over existing theories. It could be more formal and therefore more precise, broader in scope, more parsimonious, or it could take a new perspective or theoretical approach. If there is no existing theory, then almost any theory can be a step in the right direction.

As we have seen, formality, scope, and theoretical approach are determined in part by the nature of the phenomena to be interpreted. But the researcher’s interests and abilities play a role too. For example, constructing a theory that specifies the neural structures and processes underlying a set of phenomena requires specialized knowledge and experience in neuroscience (which most professional researchers would acquire in college and then graduate school). But again, many theories in psychology are relatively informal, narrow in scope, and expressed in terms that even a beginning researcher can understand and even use to construct his or her own new theory.

It is probably more common, however, for a researcher to start with a theory that was originally constructed by someone else—giving due credit to the originator of the theory. This is another example of how researchers work collectively to advance scientific knowledge. Once they have identified an existing theory, they might derive a hypothesis from the theory and test it or modify the theory to account for some new phenomenon and then test the modified theory.

Deriving Hypotheses

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

But how do researchers derive hypotheses from theories? One way is to generate a research question using the techniques discussed in Chapter 2 and then ask whether any theory implies an answer to that question. For example, you might wonder whether expressive writing about positive experiences improves health as much as expressive writing about traumatic experiences. Although this is an interesting question on its own, you might then ask whether the habituation theory—the idea that expressive writing causes people to habituate to negative thoughts and feelings—implies an answer. In this case, it seems clear that if the habituation theory is correct, then expressive writing about positive experiences should not be effective because it would not cause people to habituate to negative thoughts and feelings. A second way to derive hypotheses from theories is to focus on some component of the theory that has not yet been directly observed. For example, a researcher could focus on the process of habituation—perhaps hypothesizing that people should show fewer signs of emotional distress with each new writing session.

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

Evaluating and Revising Theories

If a hypothesis is confirmed in a systematic empirical study, then the theory has been strengthened. Not only did the theory make an accurate prediction, but there is now a new phenomenon that the theory accounts for. If a hypothesis is disconfirmed in a systematic empirical study, then the theory has been weakened. It made an inaccurate prediction, and there is now a new phenomenon that it does not account for.

Although this seems straightforward, there are some complications. First, confirming a hypothesis can strengthen a theory but it can never prove a theory. In fact, scientists tend to avoid the word “prove” when talking and writing about theories. One reason for this is that there may be other plausible theories that imply the same hypothesis, which means that confirming the hypothesis strengthens all those theories equally. A second reason is that it is always possible that another test of the hypothesis or a test of a new hypothesis derived from the theory will be disconfirmed. This is a version of the famous philosophical “problem of induction.” One cannot definitively prove a general principle (e.g., “All swans are white.”) just by observing confirming cases (e.g., white swans)—no matter how many. It is always possible that a disconfirming case (e.g., a black swan) will eventually come along. For these reasons, scientists tend to think of theories—even highly successful ones—as subject to revision based on new and unexpected observations.

A second complication has to do with what it means when a hypothesis is disconfirmed. According to the strictest version of the hypothetico-deductive method, disconfirming a hypothesis disproves the theory it was derived from. In formal logic, the premises “if A then B” and “not B” necessarily lead to the conclusion “not A.” If A is the theory and B is the hypothesis (“if A then B”), then disconfirming the hypothesis (“not B”) must mean that the theory is incorrect (“not A”). In practice, however, scientists do not give up on their theories so easily. One reason is that one disconfirmed hypothesis could be a fluke or it could be the result of a faulty research design. Perhaps the researcher did not successfully manipulate the independent variable or measure the dependent variable. A disconfirmed hypothesis could also mean that some unstated but relatively minor assumption of the theory was not met. For example, if Zajonc had failed to find social facilitation in cockroaches, he could have concluded that drive theory is still correct but it applies only to animals with sufficiently complex nervous systems.

This does not mean that researchers are free to ignore disconfirmations of their theories. If they cannot improve their research designs or modify their theories to account for repeated disconfirmations, then they eventually abandon their theories and replace them with ones that are more successful.

Incorporating Theory Into Your Research

It should be clear from this chapter that theories are not just “icing on the cake” of scientific research; they are a basic ingredient. If you can understand and use them, you will be much more successful at reading and understanding the research literature, generating interesting research questions, and writing and conversing about research. Of course, your ability to understand and use theories will improve with practice. But there are several things that you can do to incorporate theory into your research right from the start.

The first thing is to distinguish the phenomena you are interested in from any theories of those phenomena. Beware especially of the tendency to “fuse” a phenomenon to a commonsense theory of it. For example, it might be tempting to describe the negative effect of cell phone usage on driving ability by saying, “Cell phone usage distracts people from driving.” Or it might be tempting to describe the positive effect of expressive writing on health by saying, “Dealing with your emotions through writing makes you healthier.” In both of these examples, however, a vague commonsense explanation (distraction, “dealing with” emotions) has been fused to the phenomenon itself. The problem is that this gives the impression that the phenomenon has already been adequately explained and closes off further inquiry into precisely why or how it happens.

As another example, researcher Jerry Burger and his colleagues were interested in the phenomenon that people are more willing to comply with a simple request from someone with whom they are familiar (Burger, Soroka, Gonzago, Murphy, & Somervell, 1999). A beginning researcher who is asked to explain why this is the case might be at a complete loss or say something like, “Well, because they are familiar with them.” But digging just a bit deeper, Burger and his colleagues realized that there are several possible explanations. Among them are that complying with people we know creates positive feelings, that we anticipate needing something from them in the future, and that we like them more and follow an automatic rule that says to help people we like.

The next thing to do is turn to the research literature to identify existing theories of the phenomena you are interested in. Remember that there will usually be more than one plausible theory. Existing theories may be complementary or competing, but it is essential to know what they are. If there are no existing theories, you should come up with two or three of your own—even if they are informal and limited in scope. Then get in the habit of describing the phenomena you are interested in, followed by the two or three best theories of it. Do this whether you are speaking or writing about your research. When asked what their research was about, for example, Burger and his colleagues could have said something like the following:

It’s about the fact that we’re more likely to comply with requests from people we know [the phenomenon]. This is interesting because it could be because it makes us feel good [Theory 1], because we think we might get something in return [Theory 2], or because we like them more and have an automatic tendency to comply with people we like [Theory 3].

At this point, you may be able to derive a hypothesis from one of the theories. At the very least, for each research question you generate, you should ask what each plausible theory implies about the answer to that question. If one of them implies a particular answer, then you may have an interesting hypothesis to test. Burger and colleagues, for example, asked what would happen if a request came from a stranger whom participants had sat next to only briefly, did not interact with, and had no expectation of interacting with in the future. They reasoned that if familiarity created liking, and liking increased people’s tendency to comply (Theory 3), then this situation should still result in increased rates of compliance (which it did). If the question is interesting but no theory implies an answer to it, this might suggest that a new theory needs to be constructed or that existing theories need to be modified in some way. These would make excellent points of discussion in the introduction or discussion of an American Psychological Association (APA) style research report or research presentation.

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

· Working with theories is not “icing on the cake.” It is a basic ingredient of psychological research.

· Like other scientists, psychologists use the hypothetico-deductive method. They construct theories to explain or interpret phenomena (or work with existing theories), derive hypotheses from their theories, test the hypotheses, and then reevaluate the theories in light of the new results.

· There are several things that even beginning researchers can do to incorporate theory into their research. These include clearly distinguishing phenomena from theories, knowing about existing theories, constructing one’s own simple theories, using theories to make predictions about the answers to research questions, and incorporating theories into one’s writing and speaking.

3.4 Understanding Null Hypothesis Testing

The Purpose of Null Hypothesis Testing

As we have seen, psychological research typically involves measuring one or more variables for a sample and computing descriptive statistics for that sample. In general, however, the researcher’s goal is not to draw conclusions about that sample but to draw conclusions about the population that the sample was selected from. Thus researchers must use sample statistics to draw conclusions about the corresponding values in the population. These corresponding values in the population are called parameters. Imagine, for example, that a researcher measures the number of depressive symptoms exhibited by each of 50 clinically depressed adults and computes the mean number of symptoms. The researcher probably wants to use this sample statistic (the mean number of symptoms for the sample) to draw conclusions about the corresponding population parameter (the mean number of symptoms for clinically depressed adults).

Unfortunately, sample statistics are not perfect estimates of their corresponding population parameters. This is because there is a certain amount of random variability in any statistic from sample to sample. This random variability in a statistic from sample to sample is called sampling error.

One implication of this is that when there is a statistical relationship in a sample, it is not always clear that there is a statistical relationship in the population. A small difference between two group means in a sample might indicate that there is a small difference between the two group means in the population. But it could also be that there is no difference between the means in the population and that the difference in the sample is just a matter of sampling error. Similarly, a Pearson’s r value of −.29 in a sample might mean that there is a negative relationship in the population. But it could also be that there is no relationship in the population and that the relationship in the sample is just a matter of sampling error.

In fact, any statistical relationship in a sample can be interpreted in two ways:

There is a relationship in the population, and the relationship in the sample reflects this.
There is no relationship in the population, and the relationship in the sample reflects only sampling error.

The purpose of null hypothesis testing is simply to help researchers decide between these two interpretations.

The Logic of Null Hypothesis Testing

Null hypothesis testing is a formal approach to deciding between two interpretations of a statistical relationship in a sample. One interpretation is called the null hypothesis (often symbolized H0 and read as “H-naught”). This is the idea that there is no relationship in the population and that the relationship in the sample reflects only sampling error. Informally, the null hypothesis is that the sample relationship “occurred by chance.” The other interpretation is called the alternative hypothesis (often symbolized as H1). This is the idea that there is a relationship in the population and that the relationship in the sample reflects this relationship in the population.

Again, every statistical relationship in a sample can be interpreted in either of these two ways: It might have occurred by chance, or it might reflect a relationship in the population. So researchers need a way to decide between them. Although there are many specific null hypothesis testing techniques, they are all based on the same general logic. The steps are as follows:

Assume for the moment that the null hypothesis is true. There is no relationship between the variables in the population.
Determine how likely the sample relationship would be if the null hypothesis were true.
If the sample relationship would be extremely unlikely, then reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis. If it would not be extremely unlikely, then retain the null hypothesis.

Following this logic, we can begin to understand why Mehl and his colleagues concluded that there is no difference in talkativeness between women and men in the population. In essence, they asked the following question: “If there were no difference in the population, how likely is it that we would find a small difference of d = 0.06 in our sample?” Their answer to this question was that this sample relationship would be fairly likely if the null hypothesis were true. Therefore, they retained the null hypothesis—concluding that there is no evidence of a sex difference in the population. We can also see why Kanner and his colleagues concluded that there is a correlation between hassles and symptoms in the population. They asked, “If the null hypothesis were true, how likely is it that we would find a strong correlation of +.60 in our sample?” Their answer to this question was that this sample relationship would be fairly unlikely if the null hypothesis were true. Therefore, they rejected the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis—concluding that there is a positive correlation between these variables in the population.

A crucial step in null hypothesis testing is finding the likelihood of the sample result if the null hypothesis were true. This probability is called the p value. A low p value means that the sample result would be unlikely if the null hypothesis were true and leads to the rejection of the null hypothesis. A high p value means that the sample result would be likely if the null hypothesis were true and leads to the retention of the null hypothesis. But how low must the p value be before the sample result is considered unlikely enough to reject the null hypothesis? In null hypothesis testing, this criterion is called α (alpha) and is almost always set to .05. If there is less than a 5% chance of a result as extreme as the sample result if the null hypothesis were true, then the null hypothesis is rejected. When this happens, the result is said to be statistically significant. If there is greater than a 5% chance of a result as extreme as the sample result when the null hypothesis is true, then the null hypothesis is retained. This does not necessarily mean that the researcher accepts the null hypothesis as true—only that there is not currently enough evidence to conclude that it is true. Researchers often use the expression “fail to reject the null hypothesis” rather than “retain the null hypothesis,” but they never use the expression “accept the null hypothesis.”

The Misunderstood p Value

The p value is one of the most misunderstood quantities in psychological research (Cohen, 1994). Even professional researchers misinterpret it, and it is not unusual for such misinterpretations to appear in statistics textbooks!

The most common misinterpretation is that the p value is the probability that the null hypothesis is true—that the sample result occurred by chance. For example, a misguided researcher might say that because the p value is .02, there is only a 2% chance that the result is due to chance and a 98% chance that it reflects a real relationship in the population. But this is incorrect. The p value is really the probability of a result at least as extreme as the sample result if the null hypothesis were true. So a p value of .02 means that if the null hypothesis were true, a sample result this extreme would occur only 2% of the time.

You can avoid this misunderstanding by remembering that the p value is not the probability that any particular hypothesis is true or false. Instead, it is the probability of obtaining the sample result if the null hypothesis were true.

Role of Sample Size and Relationship Strength

Recall that null hypothesis testing involves answering the question, “If the null hypothesis were true, what is the probability of a sample result as extreme as this one?” In other words, “What is the p value?” It can be helpful to see that the answer to this question depends on just two considerations: the strength of the relationship and the size of the sample. Specifically, the stronger the sample relationship and the larger the sample, the less likely the result would be if the null hypothesis were true. That is, the lower the p value. This should make sense. Imagine a study in which a sample of 500 women is compared with a sample of 500 men in terms of some psychological characteristic, and Cohen’s d is a strong 0.50. If there were really no sex difference in the population, then a result this strong based on such a large sample should seem highly unlikely. Now imagine a similar study in which a sample of three women is compared with a sample of three men, and Cohen’s d is a weak 0.10. If there were no sex difference in the population, then a relationship this weak based on such a small sample should seem likely. And this is precisely why the null hypothesis would be rejected in the first example and retained in the second.

Of course, sometimes the result can be weak and the sample large, or the result can be strong and the sample small. In these cases, the two considerations trade off against each other so that a weak result can be statistically significant if the sample is large enough and a strong relationship can be statistically significant even if the sample is small. Weak relationships based on medium or small samples are never statistically significant and that strong relationships based on medium or larger samples are always statistically significant. If you keep this in mind, you will often know whether a result is statistically significant based on the descriptive statistics alone. It is extremely useful to be able to develop this kind of intuitive judgment. One reason is that it allows you to develop expectations about how your formal null hypothesis tests are going to come out, which in turn allows you to detect problems in your analyses. For example, if your sample relationship is strong and your sample is medium, then you would expect to reject the null hypothesis. If for some reason your formal null hypothesis test indicates otherwise, then you need to double-check your computations and interpretations. A second reason is that the ability to make this kind of intuitive judgment is an indication that you understand the basic logic of this approach in addition to being able to do the computations.

Statistical Significance Versus Practical Significance

A statistically significant result is not necessarily a strong one. Even a very weak result can be statistically significant if it is based on a large enough sample. This is closely related to Janet Shibley Hyde’s argument about sex differences (Hyde, 2007). The differences between women and men in mathematical problem solving and leadership ability are statistically significant. But the word significant can cause people to interpret these differences as strong and important—perhaps even important enough to influence the college courses they take or even who they vote for. As we have seen, however, these statistically significant differences are actually quite weak—perhaps even “trivial.”

This is why it is important to distinguish between the statistical significance of a result and the practical significance of that result. Practical significance refers to the importance or usefulness of the result in some real-world context. Many sex differences are statistically significant—and may even be interesting for purely scientific reasons—but they are not practically significant. In clinical practice, this same concept is often referred to as “clinical significance.” For example, a study on a new treatment for social phobia might show that it produces a statistically significant positive effect. Yet this effect still might not be strong enough to justify the time, effort, and other costs of putting it into practice—especially if easier and cheaper treatments that work almost as well already exist. Although statistically significant, this result would be said to lack practical or clinical significance.

· Null hypothesis testing is a formal approach to deciding whether a statistical relationship in a sample reflects a real relationship in the population or is just due to chance.

· The logic of null hypothesis testing involves assuming that the null hypothesis is true, finding how likely the sample result would be if this assumption were correct, and then making a decision. If the sample result would be unlikely if the null hypothesis were true, then it is rejected in favor of the alternative hypothesis. If it would not be unlikely, then the null hypothesis is retained.

· The probability of obtaining the sample result if the null hypothesis were true (the p value) is based on two considerations: relationship strength and sample size. Reasonable judgments about whether a sample relationship is statistically significant can often be made by quickly considering these two factors.

· Statistical significance is not the same as relationship strength or importance. Even weak relationships can be statistically significant if the sample size is large enough. It is important to consider relationship strength and the practical significance of a result in addition to its statistical significance.

References from Chapter 3

Burger, J. M., Soroka, S., Gonzago, K., Murphy, E., Somervell, E. (1999). The effect of fleeting attraction on compliance to requests. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1578–1586.

Cohen, J. (1994). The world is round: p .05. American Psychologist, 49, 997–1003.

Hyde, J. S. (2007). New directions in the study of gender similarities and differences. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 259–263.

Izawa, C. (Ed.) (1999). On human memory: Evolution, progress, and reflections on the 30th anniversary of the Atkinson-Shiffrin model. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J. (2003). Dissociative identity disorder: Multiplepersonalities, multiple controversies. In S. O. Lilienfeld, S. J. Lynn, J. M. Lohr (Eds.), Science and pseudoscience in clinical psychology (pp. 109–142). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T. J., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci,…Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51, 77–101.

Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Strack, F., Klumpp, G., Rittenauer-Schatka, H., Simons, A. (1991). Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 195–202.

Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269–274.

Zajonc, R. B., Heingartner, A., Herman, E. M. (1969). Social enhancement and impairment of performance in the cockroach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 83–92.

Share This Book

Live revision! Join us for our free exam revision livestreams Watch now →

Reference Library

Collections

See what's new
All Resources
Student Resources
Assessment Resources
Teaching Resources
CPD Courses
Livestreams

Study notes, videos, interactive activities and more!

Psychology news, insights and enrichment

Currated collections of free resources

Browse resources by topic

All Psychology Resources

Resource Selections

Currated lists of resources

Study Notes

Aims and Hypotheses

Last updated 22 Mar 2021

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share by Email

Observations of events or behaviour in our surroundings provoke questions as to why they occur. In turn, one or multiple theories might attempt to explain a phenomenon, and investigations are consequently conducted to test them. One observation could be that athletes tend to perform better when they have a training partner, and a theory might propose that this is because athletes are more motivated with peers around them.

The aim of an investigation, driven by a theory to explain a given observation, states the intent of the study in general terms. Continuing the above example, the consequent aim might be “to investigate the effect of having a training partner on athletes’ motivation levels”.

The theory attempting to explain an observation will help to inform hypotheses - predictions of an investigation’s outcome that make specific reference to the independent variables (IVs) manipulated and dependent variables (DVs) measured by the researchers.

There are two types of hypothesis:

- H 1 – Research hypothesis
- H 0 – Null hypothesis

H 1 – The Research Hypothesis

This predicts a statistically significant effect of an IV on a DV (i.e. an experiment), or a significant relationship between variables (i.e. a correlation study), e.g.

In an experiment: “Athletes who have a training partner are likely to score higher on a questionnaire measuring motivation levels than athletes who train alone.”
In a correlation study: ‘There will be a significant positive correlation between athletes’ motivation questionnaire scores and the number of partners athletes train with.”

The research hypothesis will be directional (one-tailed) if theory or existing evidence argues a particular ‘direction’ of the predicted results, as demonstrated in the two hypothesis examples above.

Non-directional (two-tailed) research hypotheses do not predict a direction, so here would simply predict “a significant difference” between questionnaire scores in athletes who train alone and with a training partner (in an experiment), or “a significant relationship” between questionnaire scores and number of training partners (in a correlation study).

H 0 – The Null Hypothesis

This predicts that a statistically significant effect or relationship will not be found, e.g.

In an experiment: “There will be no significant difference in motivation questionnaire scores between athletes who train with and without a training partner.”
In a correlation study: “There will be no significant relationship between motivation questionnaire scores and the number of partners athletes train with.”

When the investigation concludes, analysis of results will suggest that either the research hypothesis or null hypothesis can be retained, with the other rejected. Ultimately this will either provide evidence to support of refute the theory driving a hypothesis, and may lead to further research in the field.

A level psychology topic quiz - research methods.

Quizzes & Activities

Research Methods: MCQ Revision Test 1 for AQA A Level Psychology

Topic Videos

Example Answers for Research Methods: A Level Psychology, Paper 2, June 2018 (AQA)

Exam Support

Our subjects

› Criminology
› Economics
› Geography
› Health & Social Care
› Psychology
› Sociology
› Teaching & learning resources
› Student revision workshops
› Online student courses
› CPD for teachers
› Livestreams
› Teaching jobs

Boston House, 214 High Street, Boston Spa, West Yorkshire, LS23 6AD Tel: 01937 848885

› Contact us
› Terms of use
› Privacy & cookies

Aims And Hypotheses, Directional And Non-Directional

March 7, 2021 - paper 2 psychology in context | research methods.

In Psychology, hypotheses are predictions made by the researcher about the outcome of a study. The research can chose to make a specific prediction about what they feel will happen in their research (a directional hypothesis) or they can make a ‘general,’ ‘less specific’ prediction about the outcome of their research (a non-directional hypothesis). The type of prediction that a researcher makes is usually dependent on whether or not any previous research has also investigated their research aim.

Variables Recap:

The independent variable (IV) is the variable that psychologists manipulate/change to see if changing this variable has an effect on the depen dent variable (DV).

It is important that the only variable that is changed in research is the independent variable (IV), all other variables have to be kept constant across the control condition and the experimental conditions. Only then will researchers be able to observe the true effects of just the independent variable (IV) on the dependent variable (DV).

Research/Experimental Aim(S):

An aim is a clear and precise statement of the purpose of the study. It is a statement of why a research study is taking place. This should include what is being studied and what the study is trying to achieve. (e.g. “This study aims to investigate the effects of alcohol on reaction times”.

Hypotheses:

This is a testable statement that predicts what the researcher expects to happen in their research. The research study itself is therefore a means of testing whether or not the hypothesis is supported by the findings. If the findings do support the hypothesis then the hypothesis can be retained (i.e., accepted), but if not, then it must be rejected.

(1) Directional Hypothesis: states that the IV will have an effect on the DV and what that effect will be (the direction of results). For example, eating smarties will significantly improve an individual’s dancing ability. When writing a directional hypothesis, it is important that you state exactly how the IV will influence the DV.

Exam Tip: One of the questions that you may get asked in the exam is ‘when would a psychologist decide to use a directional hypothesis?’ In general, psychologists use a directional hypothesis when there has been previous research on the topic that they aim to investigate (the psychologist has a good idea of what the outcome of the research is going to be). For example, if a researcher was going to carry research out of the effects of alcohol on reaction times, they would predict a directional hypothesis due to the fact that there has already been lots of research looking at this area.

13 Different Types of Hypothesis

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Learn about our Editorial Process

hypothesis definition and example, explained below

There are 13 different types of hypothesis. These include simple, complex, null, alternative, composite, directional, non-directional, logical, empirical, statistical, associative, exact, and inexact.

A hypothesis can be categorized into one or more of these types. However, some are mutually exclusive and opposites. Simple and complex hypotheses are mutually exclusive, as are direction and non-direction, and null and alternative hypotheses.

Below I explain each hypothesis in simple terms for absolute beginners. These definitions may be too simple for some, but they’re designed to be clear introductions to the terms to help people wrap their heads around the concepts early on in their education about research methods .

Types of Hypothesis

Before you Proceed: Dependent vs Independent Variables

A research study and its hypotheses generally examine the relationships between independent and dependent variables – so you need to know these two concepts:

The independent variable is the variable that is causing a change.
The dependent variable is the variable the is affected by the change. This is the variable being tested.

Read my full article on dependent vs independent variables for more examples.

Example: Eating carrots (independent variable) improves eyesight (dependent variable).

1. Simple Hypothesis

A simple hypothesis is a hypothesis that predicts a correlation between two test variables: an independent and a dependent variable.

This is the easiest and most straightforward type of hypothesis. You simply need to state an expected correlation between the dependant variable and the independent variable.

You do not need to predict causation (see: directional hypothesis). All you would need to do is prove that the two variables are linked.

Simple Hypothesis Examples

Question	Simple Hypothesis
Do people over 50 like Coca-Cola more than people under 50?	On average, people over 50 like Coca-Cola more than people under 50.
According to national registries of car accident data, are Canadians better drivers than Americans?	Canadians are better drivers than Americans.
Are carpenters more liberal than plumbers?	Carpenters are more liberal than plumbers.
Do guitarists live longer than pianists?	Guitarists do live longer than pianists.
Do dogs eat more in summer than winter?	Dogs do eat more in summer than winter.

2. Complex Hypothesis

A complex hypothesis is a hypothesis that contains multiple variables, making the hypothesis more specific but also harder to prove.

You can have multiple independent and dependant variables in this hypothesis.

Complex Hypothesis Example

Question	Complex Hypothesis
Do (1) age and (2) weight affect chances of getting (3) diabetes and (4) heart disease?	(1) Age and (2) weight increase your chances of getting (3) diabetes and (4) heart disease.

In the above example, we have multiple independent and dependent variables:

Independent variables: Age and weight.
Dependent variables: diabetes and heart disease.

Because there are multiple variables, this study is a lot more complex than a simple hypothesis. It quickly gets much more difficult to prove these hypotheses. This is why undergraduate and first-time researchers are usually encouraged to use simple hypotheses.

3. Null Hypothesis

A null hypothesis will predict that there will be no significant relationship between the two test variables.

For example, you can say that “The study will show that there is no correlation between marriage and happiness.”

A good way to think about a null hypothesis is to think of it in the same way as “innocent until proven guilty”[1]. Unless you can come up with evidence otherwise, your null hypothesis will stand.

A null hypothesis may also highlight that a correlation will be inconclusive . This means that you can predict that the study will not be able to confirm your results one way or the other. For example, you can say “It is predicted that the study will be unable to confirm a correlation between the two variables due to foreseeable interference by a third variable .”

Beware that an inconclusive null hypothesis may be questioned by your teacher. Why would you conduct a test that you predict will not provide a clear result? Perhaps you should take a closer look at your methodology and re-examine it. Nevertheless, inconclusive null hypotheses can sometimes have merit.

Null Hypothesis Examples

Question	Null Hypothesis (H )
Do people over 50 like Coca-Cola more than people under 50?	Age has no effect on preference for Coca-Cola.
Are Canadians better drivers than Americans?	Nationality has no effect on driving ability.
Are carpenters more liberal than plumbers?	There is no statistically significant difference in political views between carpenters and plumbers.
Do guitarists live longer than pianists?	There is no statistically significant difference in life expectancy between guitarists and pianists.
Do dogs eat more in summer than winter?	Time of year has no effect on dogs’ appetites.

4. Alternative Hypothesis

An alternative hypothesis is a hypothesis that is anything other than the null hypothesis. It will disprove the null hypothesis.

We use the symbol H A or H 1 to denote an alternative hypothesis.

The null and alternative hypotheses are usually used together. We will say the null hypothesis is the case where a relationship between two variables is non-existent. The alternative hypothesis is the case where there is a relationship between those two variables.

The following statement is always true: H 0 ≠ H A .

Let’s take the example of the hypothesis: “Does eating oatmeal before an exam impact test scores?”

We can have two hypotheses here:

Null hypothesis (H 0 ): “Eating oatmeal before an exam does not impact test scores.”
Alternative hypothesis (H A ): “Eating oatmeal before an exam does impact test scores.”

For the alternative hypothesis to be true, all we have to do is disprove the null hypothesis for the alternative hypothesis to be true. We do not need an exact prediction of how much oatmeal will impact the test scores or even if the impact is positive or negative. So long as the null hypothesis is proven to be false, then the alternative hypothesis is proven to be true.

5. Composite Hypothesis

A composite hypothesis is a hypothesis that does not predict the exact parameters, distribution, or range of the dependent variable.

Often, we would predict an exact outcome. For example: “23 year old men are on average 189cm tall.” Here, we are giving an exact parameter. So, the hypothesis is not composite.

But, often, we cannot exactly hypothesize something. We assume that something will happen, but we’re not exactly sure what. In these cases, we might say: “23 year old men are not on average 189cm tall.”

We haven’t set a distribution range or exact parameters of the average height of 23 year old men. So, we’ve introduced a composite hypothesis as opposed to an exact hypothesis.

Generally, an alternative hypothesis (discussed above) is composite because it is defined as anything except the null hypothesis. This ‘anything except’ does not define parameters or distribution, and therefore it’s an example of a composite hypothesis.

6. Directional Hypothesis

A directional hypothesis makes a prediction about the positivity or negativity of the effect of an intervention prior to the test being conducted.

Instead of being agnostic about whether the effect will be positive or negative, it nominates the effect’s directionality.

We often call this a one-tailed hypothesis (in contrast to a two-tailed or non-directional hypothesis) because, looking at a distribution graph, we’re hypothesizing that the results will lean toward one particular tail on the graph – either the positive or negative.

Directional Hypothesis Examples

Question	Directional Hypothesis
Does adding a 10c charge to plastic bags at grocery stores lead to changes in uptake of reusable bags?	Adding a 10c charge to plastic bags in grocery stores will lead to an in uptake of reusable bags.
Does a Universal Basic Income influence retail worker wages?	Universal Basic Income retail worker wages.
Does rainy weather impact the amount of moderate to high intensity exercise people do per week in the city of Vancouver?	Rainy weather the amount of moderate to high intensity exercise people do per week in the city of Vancouver.
Does introducing fluoride to the water system in the city of Austin impact number of dental visits per capita per year?	Introducing fluoride to the water system in the city of Austin the number of dental visits per capita per year?
Does giving children chocolate rewards during study time for positive answers impact standardized test scores?	Giving children chocolate rewards during study time for positive answers standardized test scores.

7. Non-Directional Hypothesis

A non-directional hypothesis does not specify the predicted direction (e.g. positivity or negativity) of the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable.

These hypotheses predict an effect, but stop short of saying what that effect will be.

A non-directional hypothesis is similar to composite and alternative hypotheses. All three types of hypothesis tend to make predictions without defining a direction. In a composite hypothesis, a specific prediction is not made (although a general direction may be indicated, so the overlap is not complete). For an alternative hypothesis, you often predict that the even will be anything but the null hypothesis, which means it could be more or less than H 0 (or in other words, non-directional).

Let’s turn the above directional hypotheses into non-directional hypotheses.

Non-Directional Hypothesis Examples

Question	Non-Directional Hypothesis
Does adding a 10c charge to plastic bags at grocery stores lead to changes in uptake of reusable bags?	Adding a 10c charge to plastic bags in grocery stores will lead to a in uptake of reusable bags.
Does a Universal Basic Income influence retail worker wages?	Universal Basic Income retail worker wages.
Does rainy weather impact the amount of moderate to high intensity exercise people do per week in the city of Vancouver?	Rainy weather the amount of moderate to high intensity exercise people do per week in the city of Vancouver.
Does introducing fluoride to the water system in the city of Austin impact number of dental visits per capita per year?	Introducing fluoride to the water system in the city of Austin the number of dental visits per capita per year?
Does giving children chocolate rewards during study time for positive answers impact standardized test scores?	Giving children chocolate rewards during study time for positive answers standardized test scores.

8. Logical Hypothesis

A logical hypothesis is a hypothesis that cannot be tested, but has some logical basis underpinning our assumptions.

These are most commonly used in philosophy because philosophical questions are often untestable and therefore we must rely on our logic to formulate logical theories.

Usually, we would want to turn a logical hypothesis into an empirical one through testing if we got the chance. Unfortunately, we don’t always have this opportunity because the test is too complex, expensive, or simply unrealistic.

Here are some examples:

Before the 1980s, it was hypothesized that the Titanic came to its resting place at 41° N and 49° W, based on the time the ship sank and the ship’s presumed path across the Atlantic Ocean. However, due to the depth of the ocean, it was impossible to test. Thus, the hypothesis was simply a logical hypothesis.
Dinosaurs closely related to Aligators probably had green scales because Aligators have green scales. However, as they are all extinct, we can only rely on logic and not empirical data.

9. Empirical Hypothesis

An empirical hypothesis is the opposite of a logical hypothesis. It is a hypothesis that is currently being tested using scientific analysis. We can also call this a ‘working hypothesis’.

We can to separate research into two types: theoretical and empirical. Theoretical research relies on logic and thought experiments. Empirical research relies on tests that can be verified by observation and measurement.

So, an empirical hypothesis is a hypothesis that can and will be tested.

Raising the wage of restaurant servers increases staff retention.
Adding 1 lb of corn per day to cows’ diets decreases their lifespan.
Mushrooms grow faster at 22 degrees Celsius than 27 degrees Celsius.

Each of the above hypotheses can be tested, making them empirical rather than just logical (aka theoretical).

10. Statistical Hypothesis

A statistical hypothesis utilizes representative statistical models to draw conclusions about broader populations.

It requires the use of datasets or carefully selected representative samples so that statistical inference can be drawn across a larger dataset.

This type of research is necessary when it is impossible to assess every single possible case. Imagine, for example, if you wanted to determine if men are taller than women. You would be unable to measure the height of every man and woman on the planet. But, by conducting sufficient random samples, you would be able to predict with high probability that the results of your study would remain stable across the whole population.

You would be right in guessing that almost all quantitative research studies conducted in academic settings today involve statistical hypotheses.

Statistical Hypothesis Examples

Human Sex Ratio. The most famous statistical hypothesis example is that of John Arbuthnot’s sex at birth case study in 1710. Arbuthnot used birth data to determine with high statistical probability that there are more male births than female births. He called this divine providence, and to this day, his findings remain true: more men are born than women.
Lady Testing Tea. A 1935 study by Ronald Fisher involved testing a woman who believed she could tell whether milk was added before or after water to a cup of tea. Fisher gave her 4 cups in which one randomly had milk placed before the tea. He repeated the test 8 times. The lady was correct each time. Fisher found that she had a 1 in 70 chance of getting all 8 test correct, which is a statistically significant result.

11. Associative Hypothesis

An associative hypothesis predicts that two variables are linked but does not explore whether one variable directly impacts upon the other variable.

We commonly refer to this as “ correlation does not mean causation ”. Just because there are a lot of sick people in a hospital, it doesn’t mean that the hospital made the people sick. There is something going on there that’s causing the issue (sick people are flocking to the hospital).

So, in an associative hypothesis, you note correlation between an independent and dependent variable but do not make a prediction about how the two interact. You stop short of saying one thing causes another thing.

Associative Hypothesis Examples

Sick people in hospital. You could conduct a study hypothesizing that hospitals have more sick people in them than other institutions in society. However, you don’t hypothesize that the hospitals caused the sickness.
Lice make you healthy. In the Middle Ages, it was observed that sick people didn’t tend to have lice in their hair. The inaccurate conclusion was that lice was not only a sign of health, but that they made people healthy. In reality, there was an association here, but not causation. The fact was that lice were sensitive to body temperature and fled bodies that had fevers.

12. Causal Hypothesis

A causal hypothesis predicts that two variables are not only associated, but that changes in one variable will cause changes in another.

A causal hypothesis is harder to prove than an associative hypothesis because the cause needs to be definitively proven. This will often require repeating tests in controlled environments with the researchers making manipulations to the independent variable, or the use of control groups and placebo effects .

If we were to take the above example of lice in the hair of sick people, researchers would have to put lice in sick people’s hair and see if it made those people healthier. Researchers would likely observe that the lice would flee the hair, but the sickness would remain, leading to a finding of association but not causation.

Causal Hypothesis Examples

Question	Causation Hypothesis	Correlation Hypothesis
Does marriage cause baldness among men?	Marriage causes stress which leads to hair loss.	Marriage occurs at an age when men naturally start balding.
What is the relationship between recreational drugs and psychosis?	Recreational drugs cause psychosis.	People with psychosis take drugs to self-medicate.
Do ice cream sales lead to increase drownings?	Ice cream sales cause increased drownings.	Ice cream sales peak during summer, when more people are swimming and therefore more drownings are occurring.

13. Exact vs. Inexact Hypothesis

For brevity’s sake, I have paired these two hypotheses into the one point. The reality is that we’ve already seen both of these types of hypotheses at play already.

An exact hypothesis (also known as a point hypothesis) specifies a specific prediction whereas an inexact hypothesis assumes a range of possible values without giving an exact outcome. As Helwig [2] argues:

“An “exact” hypothesis specifies the exact value(s) of the parameter(s) of interest, whereas an “inexact” hypothesis specifies a range of possible values for the parameter(s) of interest.”

Generally, a null hypothesis is an exact hypothesis whereas alternative, composite, directional, and non-directional hypotheses are all inexact.

See Next: 15 Hypothesis Examples

This is introductory information that is basic and indeed quite simplified for absolute beginners. It’s worth doing further independent research to get deeper knowledge of research methods and how to conduct an effective research study. And if you’re in education studies, don’t miss out on my list of the best education studies dissertation ideas .

[1] https://jnnp.bmj.com/content/91/6/571.abstract

[2] http://users.stat.umn.edu/~helwig/notes/SignificanceTesting.pdf

Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 19 Top Cognitive Psychology Theories (Explained)
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 119 Bloom’s Taxonomy Examples
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ All 6 Levels of Understanding (on Bloom’s Taxonomy)
Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Self-Actualization Examples (Maslow's Hierarchy)

2 thoughts on “13 Different Types of Hypothesis”

Wow! This introductionary materials are very helpful. I teach the begginers in research for the first time in my career. The given tips and materials are very helpful. Chris, thank you so much! Excellent materials!

You’re more than welcome! If you want a pdf version of this article to provide for your students to use as a weekly reading on in-class discussion prompt for seminars, just drop me an email in the Contact form and I’ll get one sent out to you.

When I’ve taught this seminar, I’ve put my students into groups, cut these definitions into strips, and handed them out to the groups. Then I get them to try to come up with hypotheses that fit into each ‘type’. You can either just rotate hypothesis types so they get a chance at creating a hypothesis of each type, or get them to “teach” their hypothesis type and examples to the class at the end of the seminar.

Cheers, Chris

Hypothesis ( AQA A Level Psychology )

Revision note.

Psychology Content Creator

A hypothesis is a testable statement written as a prediction of what the researcher expects to find as a result of their experiment
A hypothesis should be no more than one sentence long
The hypothesis needs to include the independent variable (IV) and the dependent variable (DV)
For example - stating that you will measure ‘aggression’ is not enough ('aggression' has not been operationalised)
by exposing some children to an aggressive adult model whilst other children are not exposed to an aggressive adult model (operationalisation of the IV)
number of imitative and non-imitative acts of aggression performed by the child (operationalisation of the DV)

The Experimental Hypothesis

Children who are exposed to an aggressive adult model will perform more acts of imitative and non-imitative aggression than children who have not been exposed to an aggressive adult model
The experimental hypothesis can be written as a directional hypothesis or as a non-directional hypothesis

The Experimental Hypothesis: Directional

A directional experimental hypothesis (also known as one-tailed) predicts the direction of the change/difference (it anticipates more specifically what might happen)
A directional hypothesis is usually used when there is previous research which support a particular theory or outcome i.e. what a researcher might expect to happen
Participants who drink 200ml of an energy drink 5 minutes before running 100m will be faster (in seconds) than participants who drink 200ml of water 5 minutes before running 100m
Participants who learn a poem in a room in which loud music is playing will recall less of the poem's content than participants who learn the same poem in a silent room

The Experimental Hypothesis: Non-Directional

A non-directional experimental hypothesis (also known as two -tailed) does not predict the direction of the change/difference (it is an 'open goal' i.e. anything could happen)
A non-directional hypothesis is usually used when there is either no or little previous research which support a particular theory or outcome i.e. what the researcher cannot be confident as to what will happen
There will be a difference in time taken (in seconds) to run 100m depending on whether participants have drunk 200ml of an energy drink or 200ml of water 5 minutes before running
There will be a difference in recall of a poem depending on whether participants learn the poem in a room in which loud music is playing or in a silent room

The Null Hypothesis

All published psychology research must include the null hypothesis
There will be no difference in children's acts of imitative and non-imitative aggression depending on whether they have observed an aggressive adult model or a non-aggressive adult model
The null hypothesis has to begin with the idea that the IV will have no effect on the DV because until the experiment is run and the results are analysed it is impossible to state anything else!
To put this in 'laymen's terms: if you bought a lottery ticket you could not predict that you are going to win the jackpot: you have to wait for the results to find out (spoiler alert: the chances of this happening are soooo low that you might as well save your cash!)
There will be no difference in time taken (in seconds) to run 100m depending on whether participants have drunk 200ml of an energy drink or 200ml of water 5 minutes before running
There will be no difference in recall of a poem depending on whether participants learn the poem in a room in which loud music is playing or in a silent room
(NB this is not quite so slick and easy with a directional hypothesis as this sort of hypothesis will never begin with 'There will be a difference')
this is why the null hypothesis is so important - it tells the researcher whether or not their experiment has shown a difference in conditions (which is generally what they want to see, otherwise it's back to the drawing board...)

Worked example

Jim wants to test the theory that chocolate helps your ability to solve word-search puzzles

He believes that sugar helps memory as he has read some research on this in a text book

He puts up a poster in his sixth-form common room asking for people to take part after school one day and explains that they will be required to play two memory games, where eating chocolate will be involved

(a) Should Jim use a directional hypothesis in this study? Explain your answer (2 marks)

(b) Write a suitable hypothesis for this study. (4 marks)

a) Jim should use a directional hypothesis (1 mark)

because previous research exists that states what might happen (2 nd mark)

b) 'Participants will remember more items from a shopping list in a memory game within the hour after eating 50g of chocolate, compared to when they have not consumed any chocolate'

1 st mark for directional
2 nd mark for IV- eating chocolate
3 rd mark for DV- number of items remembered
4 th mark for operationalising both IV & DV
If you write a non-directional or null hypothesis the mark is 0
If you do not get the direction correct the mark is zero
Remember to operationalise the IV & DV

You've read 0 of your 0 free revision notes

Get unlimited access.

to absolutely everything:

Downloadable PDFs
Unlimited Revision Notes
Topic Questions
Past Papers
Model Answers
Videos (Maths and Science)

Join the 100,000 + Students that ❤️ Save My Exams

the (exam) results speak for themselves:

Did this page help you?

Author: Claire Neeson

Claire has been teaching for 34 years, in the UK and overseas. She has taught GCSE, A-level and IB Psychology which has been a lot of fun and extremely exhausting! Claire is now a freelance Psychology teacher and content creator, producing textbooks, revision notes and (hopefully) exciting and interactive teaching materials for use in the classroom and for exam prep. Her passion (apart from Psychology of course) is roller skating and when she is not working (or watching 'Coronation Street') she can be found busting some impressive moves on her local roller rink.

Find Study Materials for

Explanations
Business Studies
Combined Science
Engineering
English Literature
Environmental Science
Human Geography
Macroeconomics
Microeconomics
Social Studies
Browse all subjects
Read our Magazine

Create Study Materials

Flashcards Create and find the best flashcards.
Notes Create notes faster than ever before.
Study Sets Everything you need for your studies in one place.
Study Plans Stop procrastinating with our smart planner features.
Aims and Hypotheses

There is no research without a proper aim and hypotheses – aims and hypotheses in research are the supporting frameworks on a path to new scientific discoveries. To better understand their importance, let us first analyse the difference between aims and hypotheses in psychology , examine their purpose, and give some examples.

Create learning materials about Aims and Hypotheses with our free learning app!

Instand access to millions of learning materials
Flashcards, notes, mock-exams and more
Everything you need to ace your exams
Approaches in Psychology
Basic Psychology
Biological Bases of Behavior
Biopsychology
Careers in Psychology
Clinical Psychology
Cognition and Development
Cognitive Psychology
Data Handling and Analysis
Developmental Psychology
Eating Behaviour
Emotion and Motivation
Famous Psychologists
Forensic Psychology
Health Psychology
Individual Differences Psychology
Issues and Debates in Psychology
Personality in Psychology
Psychological Treatment
Relationships
Research Methods in Psychology
Causation in Psychology
Coding Frame Psychology
Correlational Studies
Cross Cultural Research
Cross Sectional Research
Ethical Issues and Ways of Dealing with Them
Experimental Designs
Features of Science
Field Experiment
Independent Group Design
Lab Experiment
Longitudinal Research
Matched Pairs Design
Meta Analysis
Natural Experiment
Observational Design
Online Research
Paradigms and Falsifiability
Peer Review and Economic Applications of Research
Pilot Studies and the Aims of Piloting
Quality Criteria
Questionnaire Construction
Repeated Measures Design
Research Methods
Sampling Frames
Sampling Psychology
Scientific Processes
Scientific Report
Scientific Research
Self-Report Design
Self-Report Techniques
Semantic Differential Rating Scale
Snowball Sampling
Schizophrenia
Scientific Foundations of Psychology
Scientific Investigation
Sensation and Perception
Social Context of Behaviour
Social Psychology

First, we will define the aims and hypotheses and learn the difference between aims and hypotheses in psychology .

Then, we will look at different types of hypotheses.

Next, we will look at the function of aims and hypotheses in research and psychology.

Later, we will look at specific aims and hypotheses in research examples.

Finally, we will discuss the need and how explicit research aims objectives and hypotheses are implemented.

Difference Between Aims and Hypotheses: Psychology

When you write a research report, you should state the aim first and then the hypothesis.

The aim is a summary of the goal or purpose of the research.

The aim is a broad starting point that gets narrowed down into the hypothesis.

The hypothesis is a predictive, testable statement about what the researcher expects to find in the study.

Types of Hypotheses

Before we get into the types of hypotheses, let's quickly recap the hypotheses' components.

The independent variable (IV) is the factor that the researcher manipulates/ changes (this can be naturally occurring in some instances) and is theorised to be the cause of a phenomenon.

And the dependent variable (DV) is the factor that the researcher measures because they believe that the changes in the IV will affect the DV.

There are two types of hypotheses: null and alternative hypotheses.

A null hypothesis states that the independent variable does not influence the dependent variable. The null hypothesis states that changes/ manipulating the IV will not affect the DV.

Research scenario: Investigation of how test results affect sleep.

An example of a null hypothesis is there is no difference in recorded sleep time (dependent variable) between students who received good and poor grades (independent variable).

An alternative hypothesis states that the independent variable has an effect on the dependent variable. Often, it is the same (or very similar) to your research hypothesis.

Research scenario: Investigating how sleep deprivation affects performance on cognitive tests.

An alternative hypothesis may be that the less sleep students get (independent variable), the worse their performance will be on cognitive tests (dependent variable). Not sleep-deprived students will perform better on the Mini-Mental Status Examination test than sleep-deprived students.

Photograph of a bed in a bedroom. StudySmarter

The alternative hypothesis can be further sub-categorised into a one- or two-tailed hypothesis. A one-tailed hypothesis (also known as a directional hypothesis) suggests that the results can go one way, e.g. it may increase or decrease. And a two-tailed (also known as a non-directional hypothesis) is exactly the opposite; there are two ways the results could expectedly go.

An example of a two-tailed hypothesis is if you flip a coin, you could predict that it will land on either heads or tails.

Aims and Hypothesis in Research

In research, aims and hypotheses play major roles. They are the part of the research that sets you up for the rest of the study. Without strong research aims and hypotheses, your research will lack direction.

First, let's go over the function of research aims.

Research aims provide an overview of the research objective; this allows all researchers to be on the same page about the purpose of the research. Aims also describe why the research is needed and how it complements existing research in the field.

Duplicating research can sometimes be useful, but most times, researchers want to conduct their own new research.

Outside of the researchers, readers can then identify the research topic and whether it interests them.

The research aimed to examine the effects of sleep deprivation on test performance.

But what information do hypotheses provide?

Hypotheses identify the variables studied in an experiment. They describe expected results in terms of the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable. When readers see the hypothesis, they should know exactly what the researcher expected in the study's outcome (remember, sometimes the researcher can be wrong).

The hypothesis was that the less sleep a student gets (independent variable), the worse grades a student will achieve (dependent variable).

Typically, researchers use hypotheses for statistical tests such as hypothesis testing, which allows them to determine if the original predictions are correct. Hypotheses are helpful because the reader can quickly identify the variables , the expected results based on previous research, and how the experiment should measure these variables .

Hypotheses usually influence the research design and analysis used in conducting the research.

Psychological research must meet a standard for the psychological research community to accept it.

Components of Hypotheses

When writing research hypotheses, there are several essential things to consider, including:

The hypotheses must be clear and concise;

it must be easy to understand and not contain irrelevant details.

The researcher must predict what they expect to find based on reading previous research findings.

The researcher must explain how they arrived at their predictions, citing evidence from prior research.

The researcher must identify all variables they will study.

One study examined how sleep deprivation affects performance on cognitive tests. The hypothesis was to identify sleeping time as the independent variable and cognitive test scores as the dependent variable.

Additionally, the research must operationalise the hypotheses and describe how the variables will be measured.

When assessing cognitive abilities, the researcher should indicate how they will assess the cognitive skills. They could do so with a cognitive test, such as the Mini-Mental Status Examination scores.

Example Hypothesis

A hypothesis denotes a relationship between two variables, the independent and dependent variables. An example hypothesis is the more you sleep, the less tired you will feel.

Aims and Hypotheses: Psychology

Now that we understand the difference between aims and hypotheses, let's take a closer look at their function.

In psychology, aims and hypotheses function very similarly to other research fields. They set up the purpose of a study so that the researchers and readers understand its goals.

The aims establish the reasoning behind the study and why that specific topic is being researched. And the hypotheses share the researchers' expectations. It outlines what the researchers expect when the IV is manipulated.

Studies with well-defined aims and hypotheses allow the research to be more accessible. This means that a professional psychologist, a psychology student, or even someone who is simply curious about the topic can all read the research and understand its purpose.

Aims and Hypotheses in Research Example

As we have learned, aims and hypotheses are crucial in setting up successful research. They exist within every study and help outline the goals and outcomes the researchers expect. To further understand the aims and hypotheses in psychological research, let's look at a famous study – Asch's line experiment .

Solomon Asch conducted a study in 1951 about conformity . This study has become renowned for exposing the strong effects of conformity in a group setting. Asch put one participant in a room with seven strangers, people he said were other participants but were, in fact, confederates.

Confederates are hired actors who are told what to do in the experiment by the researcher.

The participants were tasked with trying to match one line to three other lines. Initially, the confederates would answer correctly, but as the trials continued, they all answered incorrectly. Would the participant still give the correct answer, or would they be swayed by conformity and be wrong?

Asch found that 74% of participants conformed at least once, even though they were obviously giving the wrong answer.

Photograph of a university lecture room. StudySmarter

In this experiment, the aim was to look at the effects of conformity. More specifically, Asch aimed to see how impactful groups' pressures are on an individual's conformity. Asch hypothesised that participants would conform to the group when the confederates answered incorrectly due to social pressure.

Since we know the study's outcome, we know that Asch stayed true to his aims and provided supporting evidence for his hypothesis.

Explicit Research Aims, Objectives, and Hypotheses

An explicit research necessity across all disciplines is the operalisation of variables. When talking about operationalising a variable or hypothesis, it means that the term is defined so clearly and succinctly that there is no confusion or any grey area concerning what it means.

When operationally defining variables, researchers need to not only define what the variable is but also how they will measure it. Operationally defined hypotheses not only include detailed descriptions of variables and the outcome but also the relationship between the variables.

Remember, when studies and their results are replicated, they increase in reliability. Researchers operationally defining variables and hypotheses help future researchers replicate their study without confusion. If you do not operationally define key terms of your research and no one can replicate it, is there even a purpose to doing the research at all?

While operationally defining variables and hypotheses might seem like a simple task, it is extremely important for a successful outcome.

Aims and Hypotheses - Key takeaways

For the scientific psychological community to accept the aim, the objective must explain why the research is needed and how it will expand our current knowledge.
The two types of hypotheses are null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis.
For the scientific community of psychologists to accept a hypothesis, it must identify all variables, which researchers must operationalise.

Flashcards in Aims and Hypotheses 28

What is the definition of aims?

What is the definition of a hypothesis?

The hypothesis is a predictive, testable statement of what the researcher expects to find in the study.

What is the purpose of research aims?

The purpose of research aims are:

provide a summary of what the research goal is
describe why the research is needed and how it adds to existing research in the field
so that the readers can identify what the research topic is and of interest to them

How are hypotheses different from aims?

Hypotheses differ from aims because they are statements of the goals and purposes of the research. In contrast, hypotheses are predictive statements concerning expected results.

What are the different types of hypotheses?

The types of hypotheses are:

Null hypothesis.
Alternative hypothesis.
Directional alternative hypothesis (one-tailed) or non-directional (two-tailed).

What type of hypothesis is the following statement: ‘There will be a difference between Mini-Mental Status Examination scores in students who were and were not sleep-deprived?

Learn with 28 Aims and Hypotheses flashcards in the free StudySmarter app

We have 14,000 flashcards about Dynamic Landscapes.

Already have an account? Log in

Frequently Asked Questions about Aims and Hypotheses

How to write aims and hypotheses?

When writing aims, researchers should summarise the research goal and purpose in a straightforward statement. Moreover, researchers must ensure that it is a predictive and testable statement when writing a hypothesis. This process should summarise the expected results of the study.

What comes first, hypothesis or aims?

Researchers should write the aims first and then the hypothesis when writing research.

What are the three types of hypotheses?

The three types of hypotheses are:

What is an aim in psychology?

An aim in psychology is a summary statement of the research's goal or purpose.

How are hypotheses different from aims and objectives?

Hypotheses differ from aims and objectives because aims are a general statement of the research's goals and purposes. In contrast, hypotheses explain precisely the predicted findings in terms of the independent and dependent variables.

Test your knowledge with multiple choice flashcards

What type of hypothesis is the following statement: ‘There will be no difference in time recorded sleeping between students who received good and poor grades in their school report’?

What type of hypothesis is this statement ‘Students who were not sleep-deprived will have higher scores in the Mini-Mental Status Examination test than sleep-deprived students?

Join the StudySmarter App and learn efficiently with millions of flashcards and more!

Keep learning, you are doing great.

Discover learning materials with the free StudySmarter app

About StudySmarter

StudySmarter is a globally recognized educational technology company, offering a holistic learning platform designed for students of all ages and educational levels. Our platform provides learning support for a wide range of subjects, including STEM, Social Sciences, and Languages and also helps students to successfully master various tests and exams worldwide, such as GCSE, A Level, SAT, ACT, Abitur, and more. We offer an extensive library of learning materials, including interactive flashcards, comprehensive textbook solutions, and detailed explanations. The cutting-edge technology and tools we provide help students create their own learning materials. StudySmarter’s content is not only expert-verified but also regularly updated to ensure accuracy and relevance.

StudySmarter Editorial Team

Team Psychology Teachers

9 minutes reading time
Checked by StudySmarter Editorial Team

Study anywhere. Anytime.Across all devices.

Create a free account to save this explanation..

Save explanations to your personalised space and access them anytime, anywhere!

By signing up, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and the Privacy Policy of StudySmarter.

Join over 22 million students in learning with our StudySmarter App

The first learning app that truly has everything you need to ace your exams in one place

Flashcards & Quizzes
AI Study Assistant
Study Planner
Smart Note-Taking

Join over 22 million students in learning with our StudySmarter App

Get unlimited access with a free StudySmarter account.

Instant access to millions of learning materials.
Flashcards, notes, mock-exams, AI tools and more.
Everything you need to ace your exams.

Independent and Dependent Variables

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:

In research, a variable is any characteristic, number, or quantity that can be measured or counted in experimental investigations . One is called the dependent variable, and the other is the independent variable.

In research, the independent variable is manipulated to observe its effect, while the dependent variable is the measured outcome. Essentially, the independent variable is the presumed cause, and the dependent variable is the observed effect.

Variables provide the foundation for examining relationships, drawing conclusions, and making predictions in research studies.

Independent Variable

In psychology, the independent variable is the variable the experimenter manipulates or changes and is assumed to directly affect the dependent variable.

It’s considered the cause or factor that drives change, allowing psychologists to observe how it influences behavior, emotions, or other dependent variables in an experimental setting. Essentially, it’s the presumed cause in cause-and-effect relationships being studied.

For example, allocating participants to drug or placebo conditions (independent variable) to measure any changes in the intensity of their anxiety (dependent variable).

In a well-designed experimental study , the independent variable is the only important difference between the experimental (e.g., treatment) and control (e.g., placebo) groups.

By changing the independent variable and holding other factors constant, psychologists aim to determine if it causes a change in another variable, called the dependent variable.

For example, in a study investigating the effects of sleep on memory, the amount of sleep (e.g., 4 hours, 8 hours, 12 hours) would be the independent variable, as the researcher might manipulate or categorize it to see its impact on memory recall, which would be the dependent variable.

Dependent Variable

In psychology, the dependent variable is the variable being tested and measured in an experiment and is “dependent” on the independent variable.

In psychology, a dependent variable represents the outcome or results and can change based on the manipulations of the independent variable. Essentially, it’s the presumed effect in a cause-and-effect relationship being studied.

An example of a dependent variable is depression symptoms, which depend on the independent variable (type of therapy).

In an experiment, the researcher looks for the possible effect on the dependent variable that might be caused by changing the independent variable.

For instance, in a study examining the effects of a new study technique on exam performance, the technique would be the independent variable (as it is being introduced or manipulated), while the exam scores would be the dependent variable (as they represent the outcome of interest that’s being measured).

Examples in Research Studies

For example, we might change the type of information (e.g., organized or random) given to participants to see how this might affect the amount of information remembered.

In this example, the type of information is the independent variable (because it changes), and the amount of information remembered is the dependent variable (because this is being measured).

Independent and Dependent Variables Examples

For the following hypotheses, name the IV and the DV.

1. Lack of sleep significantly affects learning in 10-year-old boys.

IV……………………………………………………

DV…………………………………………………..

2. Social class has a significant effect on IQ scores.

DV……………………………………………….…

3. Stressful experiences significantly increase the likelihood of headaches.

4. Time of day has a significant effect on alertness.

Operationalizing Variables

To ensure cause and effect are established, it is important that we identify exactly how the independent and dependent variables will be measured; this is known as operationalizing the variables.

Operational variables (or operationalizing definitions) refer to how you will define and measure a specific variable as it is used in your study. This enables another psychologist to replicate your research and is essential in establishing reliability (achieving consistency in the results).

For example, if we are concerned with the effect of media violence on aggression, then we need to be very clear about what we mean by the different terms. In this case, we must state what we mean by the terms “media violence” and “aggression” as we will study them.

Therefore, you could state that “media violence” is operationally defined (in your experiment) as ‘exposure to a 15-minute film showing scenes of physical assault’; “aggression” is operationally defined as ‘levels of electrical shocks administered to a second ‘participant’ in another room.

In another example, the hypothesis “Young participants will have significantly better memories than older participants” is not operationalized. How do we define “young,” “old,” or “memory”? “Participants aged between 16 – 30 will recall significantly more nouns from a list of twenty than participants aged between 55 – 70” is operationalized.

The key point here is that we have clarified what we mean by the terms as they were studied and measured in our experiment.

If we didn’t do this, it would be very difficult (if not impossible) to compare the findings of different studies to the same behavior.

Operationalization has the advantage of generally providing a clear and objective definition of even complex variables. It also makes it easier for other researchers to replicate a study and check for reliability .

For the following hypotheses, name the IV and the DV and operationalize both variables.

1. Women are more attracted to men without earrings than men with earrings.

I.V._____________________________________________________________

D.V. ____________________________________________________________

Operational definitions:

I.V. ____________________________________________________________

2. People learn more when they study in a quiet versus noisy place.

I.V. _________________________________________________________

D.V. ___________________________________________________________

3. People who exercise regularly sleep better at night.

Can there be more than one independent or dependent variable in a study?

Yes, it is possible to have more than one independent or dependent variable in a study.

In some studies, researchers may want to explore how multiple factors affect the outcome, so they include more than one independent variable.

Similarly, they may measure multiple things to see how they are influenced, resulting in multiple dependent variables. This allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the topic being studied.

What are some ethical considerations related to independent and dependent variables?

Ethical considerations related to independent and dependent variables involve treating participants fairly and protecting their rights.

Researchers must ensure that participants provide informed consent and that their privacy and confidentiality are respected. Additionally, it is important to avoid manipulating independent variables in ways that could cause harm or discomfort to participants.

Researchers should also consider the potential impact of their study on vulnerable populations and ensure that their methods are unbiased and free from discrimination.

Ethical guidelines help ensure that research is conducted responsibly and with respect for the well-being of the participants involved.

Can qualitative data have independent and dependent variables?

Yes, both quantitative and qualitative data can have independent and dependent variables.

In quantitative research, independent variables are usually measured numerically and manipulated to understand their impact on the dependent variable. In qualitative research, independent variables can be qualitative in nature, such as individual experiences, cultural factors, or social contexts, influencing the phenomenon of interest.

The dependent variable, in both cases, is what is being observed or studied to see how it changes in response to the independent variable.

So, regardless of the type of data, researchers analyze the relationship between independent and dependent variables to gain insights into their research questions.

Can the same variable be independent in one study and dependent in another?

Yes, the same variable can be independent in one study and dependent in another.

The classification of a variable as independent or dependent depends on how it is used within a specific study. In one study, a variable might be manipulated or controlled to see its effect on another variable, making it independent.

However, in a different study, that same variable might be the one being measured or observed to understand its relationship with another variable, making it dependent.

The role of a variable as independent or dependent can vary depending on the research question and study design.

Research Methodology

Mixed Methods Research

Conversation Analysis

Discourse Analysis

Phenomenology In Qualitative Research

Ethnography In Qualitative Research

Narrative Analysis In Qualitative Research

8 Different Types of Hypotheses (Plus Essential Facts)

The hypothesis is an idea or a premise used as a jumping off the ground for further investigation. It’s essential to scientific research because it serves as a compass for scientists or researchers in carrying out their experiments or studies.

There are different types of hypotheses but crafting a good hypothesis can be tricky. A sound hypothesis should be logical, affirmative, clear, precise, quantifiable, or can be tested, and has a cause and effect factor.

Types

Alternative hypothesis.

Also known as a maintained hypothesis or a research hypothesis, an alternative hypothesis is the exact opposite of a null hypothesis, and it is often used in statistical hypothesis testing. There are four main types of alternative hypothesis:

Point alternative hypothesis . This hypothesis occurs when the population distribution in the hypothesis test is fully defined and has no unknown parameters. It usually has no practical interest, but it is considered important in other statistical activities.
Non-directional alternative hypothesis. These hypotheses have nothing to do with the either region of rejection (i.e., one-tailed or two-tailed directional hypotheses) but instead, only that the null hypothesis is untrue.
One-tailed directional hypothesis. This hypothesis is only concerned with the region of direction for one tail of a sampling distribution, not both of them.
Two-tailed directional hypothesis. This hypothesis is concerned with both regions of rejection of a particular sampling distribution

Known by the symbol H1, this type of hypothesis proclaims the expected relationship between the variables in the theory.

Associative and Causal Hypothesis

Associative hypotheses simply state that there is a relationship between two variables, whereas causal hypotheses state that any difference in the type or amount of one particular variable is going to directly affect the difference in the type or amount of the next variable in the equation.

Note: This post may contain affiliate links which will take you to online retailers that sell products and services. If you click on one and buy something, I may earn from qualifying purchases. See my Affiliate Disclosure for more details.

These hypotheses are often used in the field of psychology. A causal hypothesis looks at how manipulation affects events in the future, while an associative hypothesis looks at how specific events co-occur.

A good example of its practical use occurs when discussing the psychological aspects of eyewitness testimonies, and they generally affect four areas of this phenomenon: emotion and memory, system variables in the line-up, estimation of the duration of the event, and own-race bias.

Complex Hypothesis

In a complex hypothesis, a relationship exists between the variables . In these hypotheses, there are more than two independent and dependent variables, as demonstrated in the following hypotheses:

Taking drugs and smoking cigarettes leads to respiratory problems, increased tension, and cancer.
The people who are older and living in rural areas are happier than people who are younger and who live in the city or suburbs.
If you eat a high-fat diet and a few vegetables, you are more likely to suffer from hypertension and high cholesterol than someone who eats a lot of vegetables and sticks to a low-fat diet.

Directional Hypothesis

A directional hypothesis is one regarding either a positive or negative difference or change in the two variables involved. Typically based on aspects such as accepted theory, literature printed on the topic at hand, past research, and even accepted theory, researchers normally develop this type of hypothesis from research questions, and they use statistical methods to check its validity.

Words you often hear in hypotheses that are directional in nature include more, less, increase, decrease, positive, negative, higher, and lower. Directional hypotheses specify the direction or nature of the relationship between two or more independent variables and two or more dependent variables.

Non-Directional Hypothesis

This hypothesis states that there is a distinct relationship between two variables; however, it does not predict the exact nature or direction of that particular relationship.

Null Hypothesis

Indicated by the symbol Ho, a null hypothesis predicts that the variables in a certain hypothesis have no relationship to one another and that the hypothesis is normally subjected to some type of statistical analysis. It essentially states that the data and variables being investigated do not actually exist.

A perfect example of this comes when looking at scientific medical studies, where you have both an experimental and control group, and you are hypothesizing that there will be no difference in the results of these two groups.

Simple Hypothesis

This hypothesis consists of two variables, an independent variable or cause, and a dependent variable or cause. Simple hypotheses contain a relationship between these two variables. For example, the following are examples of simple hypotheses:

The more you chew tobacco, the more likely you are to develop mouth cancer.
The more money you make, the less likely you are to be involved in criminal activity.
The more educated you are, the more likely you are to have a well-paying job.

Statistical Hypothesis

This is just a hypothesis that is able to be verified through statistics. It can be either logical or illogical, but if you can use statistics to verify it, it is called a statistical hypothesis.

Facts about Hypotheses

Difference Between Simple and Complex Hypotheses

In a simple hypothesis, there is a dependent and an independent variable, as well as a relationship between the two. The independent variable is the cause and comes first when they’re in chronological order, and the dependent variable describes the effect. In a complex hypothesis, the relationship is between two or more independent variables and two or more dependent variables.

Difference Between Non-Directional and Directional Hypotheses

In a directional research hypothesis, the direction of the relationship is predicted. The advantages of this type of hypothesis include one-tailed statistical tests, theoretical propositions that can be tested in a more precise manner, and the fact that the researcher’s expectations are very clear right from the start.

In a non-directional research hypothesis, the relationship between the variables is predicted but not the direction of that relationship. Reasons to use this type of research hypothesis include when your previous research findings contradict one another and when there is no theory on which to base your predictions.

Difference Between a Hypothesis and a Theory

There are many different differences between a theory and a hypothesis, including the following:

A hypothesis is a suggestion of what might happen when you test out a theory. It is a prediction of a possible correlation between various phenomena. On the other hand, a theory has been tested and is well-substantiated. If a hypothesis succeeds in proving a certain point, it can then be called a theory.
The data for a hypothesis is most often very limited, whereas the data relating to theory has been tested under numerous circumstances.
A hypothesis offers a very specific instance; that is, it is limited to just one observation. On the other hand, a theory is more generalized and is put through a multitude of experiments and tests, which can then apply to various specific instances.
The purposes of these two items are different as well. A hypothesis starts with a possibility that is uncertain but can be studied further via observations and experiments. A theory is used to explain why large sets of observations are continuously made.
Hypotheses are based on various suggestions and possibilities but have uncertain results, while theories have a steady and reliable consensus among scientists and other professionals.
Both theories and hypotheses are testable and falsifiable, but unlike theories, hypotheses are neither well-tested nor well-substantiated.

What is the Interaction Effect?

This effect describes the two variables’ relationship to one another.

When Writing the Hypothesis, There is a Certain Format to Follow

This includes three aspects:

The correlational statement
The comparative statement
A statistical analysis

How are Hypotheses Used to Test Theories?

Do not test the entire theory, just the proposition
It can never be either proved or disproved

When Formulating a Hypothesis, There are Things to Consider

These include:

You have to write it in the present tense
It has to be empirically testable
You have to write it in a declarative sentence
It has to contain all of the variables
It must contain three parts: the purpose statement, the problem statement, and the research question
It has to contain the population

What is the Best Definition of a Scientific Hypothesis?

It is essentially an educated guess; however, that guess will lose its credibility if it is falsifiable.

How to Use Research Questions

There are two ways to include research questions when testing a theory. The first is in addition to a hypothesis related to the topic’s other areas of interest, and the second is in place of the actual hypothesis, which occurs in some instances.

Tips to Keep in Mind When Developing a Hypothesis

Use language that is very precise. Your language should be concise, simple, and clean. This is not a time when you want to be vague, because everything needs to be spelled out in great detail.
Be as logical as possible. If you believe in something, you want to prove it, and remaining logical at all times is a great start.
Use research and experimentation to determine whether your hypothesis is testable. All hypotheses need to be proven. You have to know that proving your theory is going to work, even if you find out different in the end.

What is the Number-One Purpose of a Scientific Method?

Scientific methods are there to provide a structured way to get the appropriate evidence in order to either refute or prove a scientific hypothesis.

Glossary of Terms Related to Hypotheses

Scientist pointing on a chalkboard to explain the scientific method steps.

Bivariate Data: This is data that includes two distinct variables, which are random and usually graphed via a scatter plot.

Categorical Data: These data fit into a tiny number of very discrete categories. They are usually either nominal, or non-ordered, which can include things such as age or country; or they can be ordinal, or ordered, which includes aspects such as hot or cold temperature.

Correlation: This is a measure of how closely two variables are to one another. It measures whether a change in one random variable corresponds to a change in the other random variable. For example, the correlation between smoking and getting lung cancer has been widely studied.

Data: These are the results found from conducting a survey or experiment, or even an observation study of some type.

Dependent Event: If the happening of one event affects the probability of another event occurring also, they are said to be dependent events.

Distribution: The way the probability of a random variable taking a certain value is described is called its distribution. Possible distribution functions include the cumulative, probability density, or probability mass function.

Element: This refers to an object in a certain set, and that object is an element of that set.

Empirical Probability: This refers to the likelihood of an outcome happening, and it is determined by the repeat performance of a particular experiment. You can do this by dividing the number of times that event took place by the number of times you conducted the experiment.

Equality of Sets: If two sets contain the exact same elements, they are considered equal sets. In order to determine if this is so, it can be advantageous to show that each set is contained in the other set.

Equally Likely Outcomes: Refers to outcomes that have the same probability; for example, if you toss a coin there are only two likely outcomes.

Event: This term refers to the subset of a sample space.

Expected Value: This demonstrates the average value of a quantity that is random and which has been observed numerous times in order to duplicate the same results of previous experiments.

Experiment: A scientific process that results in a set of outcomes that is observable. Even selecting a toy from a box of toys can be considered an experiment in this instance.

Experimental Probability: When you estimate how likely something is to occur, this is an experimental probability example. To get this probability, you divide the number of trials that were successful by the total number of trials that were performed.

Finite Sample Space: These sample spaces have a finite number of outcomes that could possibly occur.

Frequency: The frequency is the number of times a certain value occurs when you observe an experiment’s results.

Frequency Distribution: This refers to the data that describes possible groups or values and the frequencies that correspond to those groups or values.

Histogram: A histogram, or frequency histogram, is a bar graph that demonstrates how frequently data points occur.

Independent Event: If two events occur, and one event’s outcome has no effect on the other’s outcome, this is known as an independent event.

Infinite Sample Space: This refers to a sample space that consists of outcomes with an infinite number of possibilities.

Mutually Exclusive: Events are mutually exclusive if their outcomes have absolutely nothing in common.

Notations: Notations are operations or quantities described by symbols instead of numbers.

Observational Study: Like the name implies, these are studies that allow you to collect data through basic observation.

Odds: This is a way to express the likelihood that a certain event will happen. If you see odds of m:n, it means it is expected that a certain event will happen m times for every n times it does not happen.

One-Variable Data: Data that have related behaviors usually associated in some important way.

Outcome: The outcome is simply the result of a particular experiment. If you consider a set of all of the possible outcomes, this is called the sample space.

Probability: A probability is merely the likelihood that a certain event will take place, and it is expressed on a scale of 0 to one, with 0 meaning it is impossible that it will happen and one being a certainty that it will happen. Probability can also be expressed as a percentage, starting with 0 and ending at 100%.

Random Experiment: A random experiment is one whereby the outcome can’t be predicted with any amount of certainty, at least not before the experiment actually takes place.

Random Variable: Random variables take on different numerical values, based on the results of a particular experiment.

Replacement: Replacement is the act of returning or replacing an item back into a sample space, which takes place after an event and allows the item to be chosen more than one time.

Sample Space: This term refers to all of the possible outcomes that could result from a probability experiment.

Set: A collection of objects that is well-defined is called a set.

Simple Event: When an event is a single element of the sample space, it is known as a simple event.

Simulation: A simulation is a type of experiment that mimics a real-life event.

Single-Variable Data: These are data that use only one unknown variable.

Statistics: This is the branch of mathematics that deals with the study of quantitative data. If you analyze certain events that are governed by probability, this is called statistics.

Theoretical Probability: This probability describes the ratio of the number of outcomes in a specific event to the number of outcomes found in the sample space. It is based on the presumption that all outcomes are equally liable.

Union: Usually described by the symbol ∪, or the cup symbol, a union describes the combination of two or more sets and their elements.

Variable: A variable is a quantity that varies and is almost always represented by letters.

Share this post:

AI Generator

When doing a research action plan students in school would know that the first thing to do is to know your topic well enough. From expecting science projects to work based on your predictions and the results that may have been quite the opposite from how you depicted them. This also rings true in businesses. There is a term for that and it is often associated with the subject Science, but can also be associated with business . Scientific method or a hypothesis.

What Is a Hypothesis?

A hypothesis is a scientific wild guess, a prediction in research . A wild guess, a say from someone without any known proof. A hypothesis can also mean a scientific, educated guess that most scientists and researchers do before planning out or doing experiments to check if their guesses or their scientific ideas based on their topics are exact or correct.

Hypothesis Format

A well-structured hypothesis is crucial for guiding scientific research. Here’s a detailed format for writing a hypothesis, along with examples for each step:

1. Start with a Research Question

Before writing a hypothesis, begin with a clear and concise research question . This question identifies the focus of your study.

Example Research Question: Does the amount of daily exercise affect weight loss?

2. Identify the Variables

Identify the independent and dependent variables in your research question.

Independent Variable: The variable you manipulate (e.g., amount of daily exercise).
Dependent Variable: The variable you measure (e.g., weight loss).

3. Formulate the Hypothesis

Use the identified variables to create a testable statement . This statement should clearly express the expected relationship between the variables.

If [independent variable], then [dependent variable].
[Independent variable] will [effect] [dependent variable].

Directional vs. Non-Directional Hypothesis:

Specifies the direction of the expected relationship.
Does not specify the direction of the expected relationship, only that a relationship exists.

4. Example Hypotheses Using the Format

Research question: does caffeine affect cognitive performance, if-then statement:.

Example: If individuals consume caffeine, then their cognitive performance will improve.

Direct Statement:

Example: Caffeine consumption will improve cognitive performance.

Null Hypothesis (H0):

Example: There is no significant effect of caffeine consumption on cognitive performance.

Alternative Hypothesis (H1):

Example: There is a significant effect of caffeine consumption on cognitive performance.

Directional Hypothesis:

Non-directional hypothesis:.

Example: There is a relationship between caffeine consumption and cognitive performance.

5. Refining the Hypothesis

Ensure that your hypothesis is specific, measurable, and testable. Avoid vague terms and focus on a single independent and dependent variable.

Hypothesis Examples in Research

A hypothesis is a statement that predicts the relationship between variables. It serves as a foundation for research by providing a clear focus and direction for experiments and data analysis . Here are examples of hypotheses from various fields of research:

Research Question:

Does sunlight exposure affect plant growth?

Hypotheses:

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in plant growth between plants exposed to sunlight and those kept in the shade.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Plants exposed to sunlight grow taller than those kept in the shade.
Directional Hypothesis: Increased sunlight exposure will lead to increased plant growth.
If-Then Statement: If plants are exposed to more sunlight, then they will grow taller.

2. Psychology

Does sleep duration affect memory retention?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in memory retention between individuals who sleep for 8 hours and those who sleep for 4 hours.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Individuals who sleep for 8 hours will have better memory retention than those who sleep for 4 hours.
Directional Hypothesis: Longer sleep duration will improve memory retention.
If-Then Statement: If individuals sleep for 8 hours, then their memory retention will improve compared to those who sleep for 4 hours.

3. Education

Do interactive teaching methods improve student engagement?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in student engagement between interactive teaching methods and traditional lecture-based methods.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Interactive teaching methods result in higher student engagement compared to traditional lecture-based methods.
Directional Hypothesis: Interactive teaching methods will increase student engagement.
If-Then Statement: If teachers use interactive teaching methods, then student engagement will increase.

4. Medicine

Does a new drug reduce blood pressure more effectively than the standard medication?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in blood pressure reduction between the new drug and the standard medication.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): The new drug reduces blood pressure more effectively than the standard medication.
Directional Hypothesis: The new drug will reduce blood pressure more than the standard medication.
If-Then Statement: If patients take the new drug, then their blood pressure will decrease more than if they take the standard medication.

5. Sociology

Does socioeconomic status affect access to higher education?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between socioeconomic status and access to higher education.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Higher socioeconomic status is associated with greater access to higher education.
Directional Hypothesis: Individuals with higher socioeconomic status will have greater access to higher education.
If-Then Statement: If individuals have a higher socioeconomic status, then they will have greater access to higher education.

Hypothesis Examples in Psychology

Psychology research often explores the relationships between various cognitive, behavioral, and emotional variables. Here are some well-structured hypothesis examples in psychology:

1. Sleep Duration and Memory Retention

Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between sleep duration and memory retention.

2. Exercise and Anxiety Levels

Does regular exercise reduce anxiety levels?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in anxiety levels between individuals who exercise regularly and those who do not.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Individuals who exercise regularly will have lower anxiety levels than those who do not.
Directional Hypothesis: Regular exercise will decrease anxiety levels.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between regular exercise and anxiety levels.
If-Then Statement: If individuals exercise regularly, then their anxiety levels will decrease.

3. Social Media Usage and Self-Esteem

Does social media usage affect self-esteem in teenagers?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between social media usage and self-esteem in teenagers.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): High social media usage is associated with lower self-esteem in teenagers.
Directional Hypothesis: Increased social media usage will decrease self-esteem in teenagers.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between social media usage and self-esteem in teenagers.
If-Then Statement: If teenagers spend more time on social media, then their self-esteem will decrease.

4. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and Depression

Is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) effective in reducing symptoms of depression?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in depression symptoms between individuals who undergo CBT and those who do not.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Individuals who undergo CBT will experience a greater reduction in depression symptoms than those who do not.
Directional Hypothesis: CBT will reduce symptoms of depression.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between undergoing CBT and reduction in depression symptoms.
If-Then Statement: If individuals undergo CBT, then their symptoms of depression will decrease.

5. Parental Involvement and Academic Achievement

Does parental involvement influence academic achievement in children?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between parental involvement and academic achievement in children.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Higher levels of parental involvement are associated with higher academic achievement in children.
Directional Hypothesis: Increased parental involvement will improve academic achievement in children.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between parental involvement and academic achievement in children.
If-Then Statement: If parents are more involved in their children’s education, then their children will achieve higher academic success.

Hypothesis Examples in Science

Scientific research often involves creating hypotheses to test the relationships between variables. Here are some well-structured hypothesis examples from various fields of science:

1. Biology: Sunlight and Plant Growth

Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between sunlight exposure and plant growth.

2. Chemistry: Temperature and Reaction Rate

Does temperature affect the rate of a chemical reaction?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in the reaction rate of a chemical reaction at different temperatures.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Increasing the temperature will increase the reaction rate.
Directional Hypothesis: Higher temperatures will increase the reaction rate.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between temperature and the reaction rate.
If-Then Statement: If the temperature of a reaction increases, then the reaction rate will increase.

3. Physics: Mass and Free Fall Speed

Does the mass of an object affect its speed when falling?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in the falling speed of objects with different masses.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Objects with greater mass fall faster than those with lesser mass.
Directional Hypothesis: Heavier objects will fall faster than lighter objects.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between the mass of an object and its falling speed.
If-Then Statement: If an object’s mass increases, then its falling speed will increase.

4. Environmental Science: Fertilizers and Water Quality

Do chemical fertilizers affect water quality in nearby lakes?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant effect of chemical fertilizers on the water quality of nearby lakes.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Chemical fertilizers negatively affect the water quality of nearby lakes.
Directional Hypothesis: The use of chemical fertilizers will decrease the water quality of nearby lakes.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between the use of chemical fertilizers and the water quality of nearby lakes.
If-Then Statement: If chemical fertilizers are used, then the water quality in nearby lakes will decrease.

5. Earth Science: Soil Composition and Erosion Rate

Does soil composition affect the rate of erosion?

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in the erosion rate of soils with different compositions.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Soil composition affects the rate of erosion.
Directional Hypothesis: Soils with higher clay content will erode more slowly than sandy soils.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between soil composition and the rate of erosion.
If-Then Statement: If soil has a higher clay content, then its erosion rate will be lower compared to sandy soil.

Hypothesis Examples in Biology

In biology, hypotheses are used to explore relationships and effects within biological systems. Here are some well-structured hypothesis examples in various areas of biology:

1. Photosynthesis and Light Intensity

How does light intensity affect the rate of photosynthesis in plants?

Null Hypothesis (H0): Light intensity has no significant effect on the rate of photosynthesis in plants.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Light intensity significantly affects the rate of photosynthesis in plants.
Directional Hypothesis: Increased light intensity will increase the rate of photosynthesis in plants.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between light intensity and the rate of photosynthesis in plants.
If-Then Statement: If light intensity increases, then the rate of photosynthesis in plants will increase.

2. Temperature and Enzyme Activity

How does temperature affect the activity of the enzyme amylase?

Null Hypothesis (H0): Temperature has no significant effect on the activity of the enzyme amylase.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Temperature significantly affects the activity of the enzyme amylase.
Directional Hypothesis: Increasing the temperature will increase the activity of the enzyme amylase up to an optimal point, after which activity will decrease.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between temperature and the activity of the enzyme amylase.
If-Then Statement: If the temperature increases, then the activity of the enzyme amylase will increase up to an optimal temperature, after which it will decrease.

3. Nutrient Availability and Plant Growth

Does the availability of nutrients in soil affect the growth of plants?

Null Hypothesis (H0): Nutrient availability has no significant effect on the growth of plants.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Nutrient availability significantly affects the growth of plants.
Directional Hypothesis: Increased nutrient availability will enhance plant growth.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between nutrient availability and plant growth.
If-Then Statement: If nutrient availability in the soil increases, then the growth of plants will be enhanced.

4. Genetic Variation and Disease Resistance

Does genetic variation in a population affect its resistance to diseases?

Null Hypothesis (H0): Genetic variation has no significant effect on disease resistance in a population.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Genetic variation significantly affects disease resistance in a population.
Directional Hypothesis: Populations with greater genetic variation will have higher resistance to diseases.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between genetic variation and disease resistance in a population.
If-Then Statement: If a population has greater genetic variation, then its resistance to diseases will be higher.

5. Water pH and Aquatic Life Health

Does the pH level of water affect the health of aquatic life?

Null Hypothesis (H0): The pH level of water has no significant effect on the health of aquatic life.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): The pH level of water significantly affects the health of aquatic life.
Directional Hypothesis: Extreme pH levels (both high and low) will negatively affect the health of aquatic life.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between the pH level of water and the health of aquatic life.
If-Then Statement: If the pH level of water is too high or too low, then the health of aquatic life will be negatively affected.

Hypothesis Examples in Sociology

In sociology, hypotheses are used to explore and explain social phenomena, behaviors, and relationships within societies. Here are some well-structured hypothesis examples in various areas of sociology:

1. Education and Social Mobility

Does access to higher education affect social mobility?

Null Hypothesis (H0): Access to higher education has no significant effect on social mobility.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Access to higher education significantly affects social mobility.
Directional Hypothesis: Increased access to higher education will improve social mobility.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between access to higher education and social mobility.
If-Then Statement: If individuals have increased access to higher education, then their social mobility will improve.

2. Income Inequality and Crime Rates

Does income inequality influence crime rates in urban areas?

Null Hypothesis (H0): Income inequality has no significant effect on crime rates in urban areas.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Income inequality significantly affects crime rates in urban areas.
Directional Hypothesis: Higher income inequality will lead to higher crime rates in urban areas.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between income inequality and crime rates in urban areas.
If-Then Statement: If income inequality increases, then crime rates in urban areas will increase.

3. Social Media Use and Social Interaction

Does the use of social media affect face-to-face social interactions among teenagers?

Null Hypothesis (H0): The use of social media has no significant effect on face-to-face social interactions among teenagers.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): The use of social media significantly affects face-to-face social interactions among teenagers.
Directional Hypothesis: Increased use of social media will decrease face-to-face social interactions among teenagers.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between the use of social media and face-to-face social interactions among teenagers.
If-Then Statement: If teenagers use social media more frequently, then their face-to-face social interactions will decrease.

4. Gender Roles and Career Choices

Do traditional gender roles influence career choices among young adults?

Null Hypothesis (H0): Traditional gender roles have no significant effect on career choices among young adults.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Traditional gender roles significantly affect career choices among young adults.
Directional Hypothesis: Adherence to traditional gender roles will limit career choices among young adults.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between traditional gender roles and career choices among young adults.
If-Then Statement: If young adults adhere to traditional gender roles, then their career choices will be limited.

5. Cultural Diversity and Workplace Productivity

Does cultural diversity in the workplace affect productivity levels?

Null Hypothesis (H0): Cultural diversity in the workplace has no significant effect on productivity levels.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Cultural diversity in the workplace significantly affects productivity levels.
Directional Hypothesis: Increased cultural diversity will improve productivity levels in the workplace.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a relationship between cultural diversity in the workplace and productivity levels.
If-Then Statement: If the workplace has increased cultural diversity, then productivity levels will improve.

More Hypothesis Samples & Examples in PDF

1. research hypothesis.

2. Education Hypothesis

3. Basic Hypothesis

4. Hypothesis Statement Template

5. Hypothesis in PDF

6. Hypothesis Format

7. Hypothesis Examples

8. Simple Hypothesis

Types of Hypothesis

A hypothesis is a statement that can be tested and is often used in scientific research to propose a relationship between two or more variables. Understanding the different types of hypotheses is essential for conducting effective research. Below are the main types of hypotheses:

1. Null Hypothesis (H0)

The null hypothesis states that there is no relationship between the variables being studied. It assumes that any observed effect is due to chance. Researchers often aim to disprove the null hypothesis.

Example: There is no significant difference in test scores between students who study with music and those who study in silence.

2. Alternative Hypothesis (H1 or Ha)

The alternative hypothesis suggests that there is a relationship between the variables being studied. It is what researchers seek to prove.

Example: Students who study with music have higher test scores than those who study in silence.

3. Simple Hypothesis

A simple hypothesis predicts a relationship between a single independent variable and a single dependent variable.

Example: Increasing the amount of sunlight will increase the growth rate of plants.

4. Complex Hypothesis

A complex hypothesis predicts a relationship involving two or more independent variables and/or two or more dependent variables.

Example: Increasing sunlight and water will increase the growth rate and height of plants.

5. Directional Hypothesis

A directional hypothesis specifies the direction of the expected relationship between variables. It suggests whether the relationship is positive or negative.

Example: Students who study for more hours will score higher on exams.

6. Non-Directional Hypothesis

A non-directional hypothesis does not specify the direction of the relationship. It only states that a relationship exists.

Example: There is a difference in test scores between students who study with music and those who study in silence.

7. Statistical Hypothesis

A statistical hypothesis involves quantitative data and can be tested using statistical methods. It often includes both null and alternative hypotheses.

Example: The mean test scores of students who study with music are significantly different from those who study in silence.

8. Causal Hypothesis

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

Example: Smoking causes lung cancer.

9. Associative Hypothesis

An associative hypothesis suggests that variables are related but does not imply causation.

Example: There is an association between physical activity levels and body weight.

10. Research Hypothesis

A research hypothesis is a broad statement that serves as the foundation for the research study. It is often the same as the alternative hypothesis.

Example: Implementing a new teaching strategy will improve student engagement and performance.

How To Use Hypothesis for Research?

A hypothesis is a critical component of the research process, providing a clear direction for the study and forming the basis for drawing conclusions. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to use a hypothesis in research:

1. Identify the Research Problem

Before formulating a hypothesis, clearly define the research problem or question. This step involves understanding what you aim to investigate and why it is significant.

Example: You want to study the impact of sleep on academic performance among college students.

2. Review Existing Literature

Conduct a thorough review of existing literature to understand what is already known about the topic. This helps in identifying gaps in knowledge and forming a basis for your hypothesis.

Example: Previous studies suggest a positive correlation between sleep duration and academic performance but lack specific data on college students.

Based on the research problem and literature review, formulate a clear and testable hypothesis. Ensure it is specific and relates directly to the variables being studied.

Types of Hypotheses:

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant relationship between sleep duration and academic performance among college students.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is a significant relationship between sleep duration and academic performance among college students.

4. Define Variables

Clearly define the independent and dependent variables involved in the hypothesis.

Independent Variable: Sleep duration
Dependent Variable: Academic performance (e.g., GPA)

5. Design the Study

Choose an appropriate research design to test the hypothesis. This could be experimental, correlational, or observational, depending on the nature of your research question.

Example: Conduct a correlational study to examine the relationship between sleep duration and GPA among college students.

6. Collect Data

Gather data through surveys, experiments, or secondary data sources. Ensure the data collection methods are reliable and valid to accurately test the hypothesis.

Example: Use a questionnaire to collect data on students’ sleep duration and their GPAs.

7. Analyze the Data

Use appropriate statistical methods to analyze the data. This step involves testing the hypothesis to determine whether to accept or reject the null hypothesis.

Example: Perform a Pearson correlation analysis to examine the relationship between sleep duration and GPA.

8. Interpret the Results

Interpret the results of the statistical analysis. Determine if the data supports the alternative hypothesis or if the null hypothesis cannot be rejected.

Example: If the analysis shows a significant positive correlation, you can reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis that sleep duration is related to academic performance.

9. Draw Conclusions

Draw conclusions based on the results of the hypothesis testing. Discuss the implications of the findings and how they contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

Example: Conclude that longer sleep duration is associated with higher GPA among college students and discuss potential implications for student health and academic policies.

10. Report and Share Findings

Write a detailed report or research paper presenting the hypothesis, methodology, results, and conclusions. Share your findings with the academic community or relevant stakeholders.

Example: Publish the study in a peer-reviewed journal or present it at an academic conference.

How to Write a Hypothesis?

Writing a hypothesis is a crucial step in the scientific method. A well-constructed hypothesis guides your research, helping you design experiments and analyze results. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to write an effective hypothesis:

1. Understand the Research Question

Start by clearly understanding the research question or problem you want to address. This helps in formulating a focused hypothesis.

Example: How does sunlight exposure affect plant growth?

2. Conduct Preliminary Research

Review existing literature related to your research question. This helps in understanding what is already known and identifying gaps in knowledge.

Example: Studies show that plants generally grow better with more sunlight, but the optimal amount varies.

3. Identify Variables

Determine the independent and dependent variables for your study.

Independent Variable: The factor you manipulate (e.g., sunlight exposure).
Dependent Variable: The factor you measure (e.g., plant growth).

4. Formulate a Simple Hypothesis

A simple hypothesis involves one independent and one dependent variable. Clearly state the expected relationship between these variables.

Example: Increasing sunlight exposure will increase plant growth.

5. Choose the Type of Hypothesis

Decide whether your hypothesis will be null or alternative, directional or non-directional.

Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no relationship between the variables.
Alternative Hypothesis (H1): There is a relationship between the variables.
Directional Hypothesis: Specifies the direction of the relationship.
Non-Directional Hypothesis: Does not specify the direction.

Example of Directional Hypothesis: Plants exposed to more sunlight will grow taller than those exposed to less sunlight.

6. Ensure Testability

Make sure your hypothesis can be tested through experiments or observations. It should be measurable and falsifiable.

Example: Plants will be grown under different levels of sunlight, and their growth will be measured over time.

7. Write the Hypothesis

Write your hypothesis in a clear, concise, and specific manner. It should include the variables and the expected relationship between them.

Example: If plants are exposed to increased sunlight, then they will grow taller compared to plants that receive less sunlight.

8. Refine the Hypothesis

Ensure that your hypothesis is specific and narrow enough to be testable but broad enough to cover the scope of your research.

Example: If tomato plants are exposed to 8 hours of sunlight per day, then they will grow taller and produce more fruit compared to tomato plants exposed to 4 hours of sunlight per day.

How Do You Formulate a Hypothesis?

To formulate a hypothesis, identify the research question, review existing literature, define variables, and create a testable statement predicting the relationship between the variables.

What Is the Difference Between Null and Alternative Hypotheses?

The null hypothesis (H0) states there is no effect or relationship, while the alternative hypothesis (H1) proposes that there is an effect or relationship.

Why Is a Hypothesis Important in Research?

A hypothesis provides a clear focus for the study, guiding the research design, data collection, and analysis, ultimately helping to draw meaningful conclusions.

Can a Hypothesis Be Proven True?

A hypothesis cannot be proven true; it can only be supported or refuted through experimentation and analysis. Even if supported, it remains open to further testing.

What Makes a Good Hypothesis?

A good hypothesis is clear, concise, specific, testable, and based on existing knowledge. It should predict a relationship between variables that can be measured.

How Is a Hypothesis Tested?

A hypothesis is tested through experiments or observations, collecting and analyzing data to determine if the results support or refute the hypothesis.

What Are the Types of Hypotheses?

Types of hypotheses include null, alternative, simple, complex, directional, non-directional, statistical, causal, and associative.

What Is a Directional Hypothesis?

A directional hypothesis specifies the expected direction of the relationship between variables, indicating whether the effect will be positive or negative.

What Is a Non-Directional Hypothesis?

A non-directional hypothesis states that a relationship exists between variables but does not specify the direction of the relationship.

How Do You Refine a Hypothesis?

Refine a hypothesis by ensuring it is specific, measurable, and testable. Remove any vague terms and focus on a single independent and dependent variable.

Text prompt

Instructive
Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

What’s wrong with shame?

Shame gets a bad rep these days. It appears to be some kind of psychological scapegoat. Allegedly, shame can explain why people feel really bad all the time or have bad relationships . It could be a sign of religious fanaticism. The “walk of shame” is viewed as a consequence of sexual promiscuity. Some influencers go as far as to label shame as “dangerous.”

I’ll zag here and make the opposite claim. Shame is useful. It’s beneficial. And it’s necessary for healthy social development.

But what exactly is shame? Shame stems from our moral conscience . It’s a signal that goes off when we’ve done something wrong in social contexts. When people are caught breaking a rule or violating a norm, they may feel shame as a result.

We go to great lengths to avoid feeling ashamed. It’s painful for a reason—it keeps our dark impulses in check. It’s our mind’s way of letting us know when we’ve done something bad, in part because we care about our social reputations and don’t want others to view us unfavorably. Without shame, people would behave like lunatics. When we describe someone as “shameless,” we mean it as a pejorative.

What makes shame different from guilt?

Some might push back at my claim by noting that guilt (not shame) is actually the emotion that occurs after we’ve done something bad and that shame is different because it’s about one’s feelings of self-worth as a whole person. Others might posit that shame is a more “public” emotion that occurs when others judge us, and we internalize this judgment, whereas guilt is a more “private” emotion that occurs when people feel that they’ve violated their own personal standards.

I disagree with both of these framings.

Research suggests that shame can be experienced internally and externally but that in the majority of cases , people feel these emotions publicly. Private feelings of shame or guilt are less common. Mostly, people experience these feelings in the presence of others that they know well (e.g., significant others, family members), although embarrassment tends to be more common in front of acquaintances or strangers.

Studies show that shame and guilt overlap in substantial ways . People generally rate them as intense and unpleasant feelings that lasted a while and occurred in very serious situations. Participants who described their experiences with each emotion said that they felt personally responsible for their (wrong) actions, a sense of responsibility, and a desire to make amends. They also felt other co-occurring emotions, such as anger and disgust, which were directed inward.

That means people felt high arousal negativity as a result of their own actions, which warranted them to display humbleness and seek forgiveness . People were also harsher on themselves than they believed others felt towards them. Overall, the evidence suggests that psychological experiences of guilt and shame are more similar than different.

Is shame actually useful?

OK, so shame and guilt are comparable emotions, and they mostly occur in the presence of others. But does that mean they’re helpful? What do people want to do with these feelings?

To answer this, researchers asked people about instances where they felt guilt, shame, regret, or embarrassment and also asked participants what they wanted to do in response to those emotions. They found that people reported strong motivations not only for social repair (e.g., to make an apology) but also to improve themselves (e.g., “I felt the urge to be a better person”). This motivation for self-improvement was even stronger following shame than for guilt, embarrassment, or regret.

The researchers noted that, in some cases, guilt can be alleviated by simply apologizing but not necessarily changing one’s behavior moving forward. The reason why shame might feel weightier and more difficult to alleviate is because it doesn’t go away with a mere apology—it requires holistic self-development. Shame causes people to want to be better humans. And that’s not easy! Despite the anguish, shame had the strongest potential to promote growth, compared to other emotions. This makes shame a double-edged sword.

The study authors ended their paper with a quote attributed to Blaise Pascal: “The only shame is to have none.” I suggest we all dwell on this idea.

Ferreira, C., Moura-Ramos, M., Matos, M., & Galhardo, A. (2022). A new measure to assess external and internal shame: Development, factor structure and psychometric properties of the external and internal shame scale. Current Psychology, 41 (4), 1892-1901.

Lickel, B., Kushlev, K., Savalei, V., Matta, S., & Schmader, T. (2014). Shame and the motivation to change the self. Emotion, 14 (6), 1049.

Tangney, J. P., Miller, R. S., Flicker, L., & Barlow, D. H. (1996). Are shame, guilt, and embarrassment distinct emotions? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70 (6), 1256.

Dylan Selterman, Ph.D., is an Associate Teaching Professor at Johns Hopkins University in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences. He teaches courses and conducts research on personality traits, happiness, relationships, morality/ethics, game theory, political psychology, and more.

Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Online Therapy
International
New Zealand
South Africa
Switzerland
Asperger's
Bipolar Disorder
Chronic Pain
Eating Disorders
Passive Aggression
Personality
Goal Setting
Positive Psychology
Stopping Smoking
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
Child Development
Self Tests NEW
Therapy Center
Diagnosis Dictionary
Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

Emotional Intelligence
Gaslighting
Affective Forecasting
Neuroscience

Find Study Materials for

Explanations
Business Studies
Combined Science
Computer Science
Engineering
English literature
Environmental Science
Human Geography
Macroeconomics
Microeconomics
Social Studies
Browse all subjects
Textbook Solutions
Read our Magazine

Create Study Materials

Flashcards Create and find the best flashcards.
Notes Create notes faster than ever before.
Study Sets Everything you need for your studies in one place.
Study Plans Stop procrastinating with our smart planner features.
Formulation of Hypothesis

Children who spend more time playing outside are more likely to be imaginative. What do you think this statement is an example of in terms of scientific research ? If you guessed a hypothesis, then you'd be correct. The formulation of hypotheses is a fundamental step in psychology research.

Create learning materials about Formulation of Hypothesis with our free learning app!

Instand access to millions of learning materials
Flashcards, notes, mock-exams and more
Everything you need to ace your exams
Approaches in Psychology
Basic Psychology
Biological Bases of Behavior
Biopsychology
Careers in Psychology
Clinical Psychology
Bartlett War of the Ghosts
Brain Development
Bruner and Minturn Study of Perceptual Set
Case Studies Psychology
Computation
Conservation of Number Piaget
Constructive Processes in Memory
Correlation
Data handling
Depth Cues Psychology
Designing Research
Developmental Research
Dweck's Theory of Mindset
Ethical considerations in research
Experimental Method
Factors Affecting Perception
Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Memory
Gibson's Theory of Direct Perception
Gregory's Constructivist Theory of Perception
Gunderson et al 2013 study
Hughes Policeman Doll Study
Issues and Debates in Developmental Psychology
Language and Perception
McGarrigle and Donaldson Naughty Teddy
Memory Processes
Memory recall
Nature and Nurture in Development
Normal Distribution Psychology
Perception Research
Perceptual Set
Piagets Theory in Education
Planning and Conducting Research
Population Samples
Primary and Secondary Data
Quantitative Data
Quantitative and Qualitative Data
Quantitative and Qualitative Methods
Research Procedures
Serial Position Effect
Short-term Retention
Structures of Memory
Tables, Charts and Graphs
The Effects of Learning on Development
The Gilchrist And Nesberg Study Of Motivation
Three Mountains Task
Types of Variable
Types of bias and how to control
Visual Cues and Constancies
Visual illusions
Willingham's Learning Theory
Cognition and Development
Cognitive Psychology
Data Handling and Analysis
Developmental Psychology
Eating Behaviour
Emotion and Motivation
Famous Psychologists
Forensic Psychology
Health Psychology
Individual Differences Psychology
Issues and Debates in Psychology
Personality in Psychology
Psychological Treatment
Relationships
Research Methods in Psychology
Schizophrenia
Scientific Foundations of Psychology
Scientific Investigation
Sensation and Perception
Social Context of Behaviour
Social Psychology
First, we will discuss the importance of hypotheses in research.
We will then cover formulating hypotheses in research, including the steps in the formulation of hypotheses in research methodology.
We will provide examples of hypotheses in research throughout the explanation.
Finally, we will delve into the different types of hypotheses in research.

What is a Hypothesis?

The current community of psychologists believe that the best approach to understanding behaviour is to conduct scientific research . To be classed as scientific research , it must be observable, valid, reliable and follow a standardised procedure.

One of the important steps in scientific research is to formulate a hypothesis before starting the study procedure.

The hypothesis is a predictive, testable statement predicting the outcome and the results the researcher expects to find.

The hypothesis provides a summary of what direction, if any, is taken to investigate a theory.

In scientific research, there is a criterion that hypotheses need to be met to be regarded as acceptable.

If a hypothesis is disregarded, the research may be rejected by the community of psychology researchers.

Importance of Hypothesis in Research

The purpose of including hypotheses in psychology research is:

To provide a summary of the research, how it will be investigated, and what is expected to be found.
To provide an answer to the research question.

When carrying out research, researchers first investigate the research area they are interested in. From this, researchers are required to identify a gap in the literature.

Filling the gap essentially means finding what previous work has not been explained yet, investigated to a sufficient degree, or simply expanding or further investigating a theory if doubt exists.

The researcher then forms a research question that the researcher will attempt to answer in their study.

Remember, the hypothesis is a predictive statement of what is expected to happen when testing the research question.

The hypothesis can be used for later data analysis. This includes inferential tests such as hypothesis testing and identifying if statistical findings are significant.

Formulation of testable hypotheses, four people with question marks above their heads, Vaia

Steps in the Formulation of Hypothesis in Research Methodology

Researchers must follow certain steps to formulate testable hypotheses when conducting research.

Overall, the researcher has to consider the direction of the research, i.e. will it be looking for a difference caused by independent variables ? Or will it be more concerned with the correlation between variables?

All researchers will likely complete the following.

Investigating background research in the area of interest.
Formulating or investigating a theory.
Identify how the theory will be tested and what the researcher expects to find based on relevant, previously published scientific works.

The above steps are used to formulate testable hypotheses.

The Formulation of Testable Hypotheses

The hypothesis is important in research as it indicates what and how a variable will be investigated.

The hypothesis essentially summarises what and how something will be investigated. This is important as it ensures that the researcher has carefully planned how the research will be done, as the researchers have to follow a set procedure to conduct research.

This is known as the scientific method.

Formulating Hypotheses in Research

When formulating hypotheses, things that researchers should consider are:

Hypothesis Requirement	Description
It should be written as predictive statements regarding the relationship between the IV and DV.	The researcher should be able to predict what they expect to find from the study results. The researcher could state that they expect to see a difference. Occasionally, researchers may theorise what changes are expected to be observed (two-tailed alternative hypothesis).
It should be formulated based on background research.	Hypotheses should not be based on guesswork. Instead, researchers should use previously published research to predict the study's expected outcome.
Identify the IV.	IV is what the experimenter manipulates to see if it affects the DV.
Identify the DV.	DV is the variable being measured after the IV has been manipulated or after it changes during the experiment.
The should be operationalised.	The researchers must define how each variable (IV and DV) will be measured. For example, may be measured using a performance test, such as the Mini-Mental Status Examination. When a hypothesis is operationalised, it is testable.
The hypotheses need to be falsifiable.	Other researchers need to be able to replicate the research using the same variables to see whether they can verify the results. The hypothesis needs to be written in a way that is falsifiable, meaning it can be tested using the scientific method to see if it is true.An example of a non-falsifiable hypothesis is "leprechauns always find the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow."
The hypotheses should be clear.	Hypotheses are usually only a sentence long and should only include the details summarised above. A good hypothesis should not include irrelevant information.

Types of Hypotheses in Research

Researchers can propose different types of hypotheses when carrying out research.

The following research scenario will be discussed to show examples of each type of hypothesis that the researchers could use. "A research team was investigating whether memory performance is affected by depression ."

The identified independent variable is the severity of depression scores, and the dependent variable is the scores from a memory performance task.

The null hypothesis predicts that the results will show no or little effect. The null hypothesis is a predictive statement that researchers use when it is thought that the IV will not influence the DV.

In this case, the null hypothesis would be there will be no difference in memory scores on the MMSE test of those who are diagnosed with depression and those who are not.

An alternative hypothesis is a predictive statement used when it is thought that the IV will influence the DV. The alternative hypothesis is also called a non-directional, two-tailed hypothesis, as it predicts the results can go either way, e.g. increase or decrease.

The example in this scenario is there will be an observed difference in scores from a memory performance task between people with high- or low-depressive scores.

The directional alternative hypothesis states how the IV will influence the DV, identifying a specific direction, such as if there will be an increase or decrease in the observed results.

The example in this scenario is people with low depressive scores will perform better in the memory performance task than people who score higher in depressive symptoms.

Example Hypothesis in Research

To summarise, let's look at an example of a straightforward hypothesis that indicates the relationship between two variables: the independent and the dependent.

If you stay up late, you will feel tired the following day; the more caffeine you drink, the harder you find it to fall asleep, or the more sunlight plants get, the taller they will grow.

Formulation of Hypothesis - Key Takeaways

The current community of psychologists believe that the best approach to understanding behaviour is to conduct scientific research. One of the important steps in scientific research is to create a hypothesis.
The hypothesis is a predictive, testable statement concerning the outcome/results that the researcher expects to find.
Hypotheses are needed in research to provide a summary of what the research is, how to investigate a theory and what is expected to be found, and to provide an answer to the research question so that the hypothesis can be used for later data analysis.
There are requirements for the formulation of testable hypotheses. The hypotheses should identify and operationalise the IV and DV. In addition, they should describe the nature of the relationship between the IV and DV.
There are different types of hypotheses: Null hypothesis, Alternative hypothesis (this is also known as the non-directional, two-tailed hypothesis), and Directional hypothesis (this is also known as the one-tailed hypothesis).

Flashcards in Formulation of Hypothesis 18

What type of hypothesis matches the following definition. A predictive statement that researchers use when it is thought that the IV will not influence the DV.

Null hypothesis

What type of hypothesis matches the following definition. A hypothesis that states that the IV will influence the DV. But, the hypothesis does not state how the IV will influence the DV.

Alternative hypothesis

What type of hypothesis matches the following definition. A hypothesis that states that the IV will influence the DV, and states how it will influence the DV.

Directional, alternative hypothesis

Which type of hypothesis is also known as a two-tailed hypothesis?

What type of hypothesis is the following example. There will be no observed difference in scores from a memory performance task between people with high- or low-depressive scores.

What type of hypothesis is the following example. There will be an observed difference in scores from a memory performance task between people with high- or low-depressive scores.

Learn with 18 Formulation of Hypothesis flashcards in the free Vaia app

We have 14,000 flashcards about Dynamic Landscapes.

Already have an account? Log in

Frequently Asked Questions about Formulation of Hypothesis

What are the 3 types of hypotheses?

The three types of hypotheses are:

Null hypothesis
Alternative hypothesis
Directional/non-directional hypothesis

What is an example of a hypothesis in psychology?

An example of a null hypothesis in psychology is, there will be no observed difference in scores from a memory performance task between people with high- or low-depressive scores.

What are the steps in formulating a hypothesis?

All researchers will likely complete the following

Investigating background research in the area of interest
Formulating or investigating a theory
Identify how the theory will be tested and what the researcher expects to find based on relevant, previously published scientific works

What is formulation of hypothesis in research?

The formulation of a hypothesis in research is when the researcher formulates a predictive statement of what is expected to happen when testing the research question based on background research.

How to formulate null and alternative hypothesis?

When formulating a null hypothesis the researcher would state a prediction that they expect to see no difference in the dependent variable when the independent variable changes or is manipulated. Whereas, when using an alternative hypothesis then it would be predicted that there will be a change in the dependent variable. The researcher can state in which direction they expect the results to go.

Test your knowledge with multiple choice flashcards

Join the Vaia App and learn efficiently with millions of flashcards and more!

Keep learning, you are doing great.

Discover learning materials with the free Vaia app

Vaia is a globally recognized educational technology company, offering a holistic learning platform designed for students of all ages and educational levels. Our platform provides learning support for a wide range of subjects, including STEM, Social Sciences, and Languages and also helps students to successfully master various tests and exams worldwide, such as GCSE, A Level, SAT, ACT, Abitur, and more. We offer an extensive library of learning materials, including interactive flashcards, comprehensive textbook solutions, and detailed explanations. The cutting-edge technology and tools we provide help students create their own learning materials. StudySmarter’s content is not only expert-verified but also regularly updated to ensure accuracy and relevance.

Vaia Editorial Team

Team Psychology Teachers

8 minutes reading time
Checked by Vaia Editorial Team

Study anywhere. Anytime.Across all devices.

Create a free account to save this explanation..

Save explanations to your personalised space and access them anytime, anywhere!

By signing up, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and the Privacy Policy of Vaia.

Join over 22 million students in learning with our Vaia App

The first learning app that truly has everything you need to ace your exams in one place

Flashcards & Quizzes
AI Study Assistant
Study Planner
Smart Note-Taking

Join over 22 million students in learning with our Vaia App

Privacy Overview

Get unlimited access with a free vaia account..

Instant access to millions of learning materials.
Flashcards, notes, mock-exams, AI tools and more.
Everything you need to ace your exams.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Review Article
Published: 18 June 2024

Development of prosociality and the effects of adversity

Tina Malti ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8241-1230 1 , 2 &
Ruth Speidel ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6775-6748 2

Nature Reviews Psychology ( 2024 ) Cite this article

116 Accesses

40 Altmetric

Metrics details

Signs and symptoms

Understanding how children become kind and caring prosocial adults matters for the survival and thriving of humanity. However, adversity can impact children’s prosocial potential in multifaceted ways. In this Review, we provide critical insights into how humans become prosocial from a developmental-relational perspective. We begin by discussing central factors underlying the development of prosociality in children. Next, we summarize research on the effects of adversity on prosocial development, including the effects of exposure to traumatic life events and everyday hurts and stressors, as well as protective factors that help children to find, remain on, or return to a prosocial path. Then we discuss interventions to nurture prosociality from an early age in every individual, emphasizing the role of practices of care to create positive change at community levels. Finally, we make recommendations for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

55,14 € per year

only 4,60 € per issue

Buy this article

Purchase on Springer Link
Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Determinants of behaviour and their efficacy as targets of behavioural change interventions

Being facially expressive is socially advantageous

Cognitive control training with domain-general response inhibition does not change children’s brains or behavior

Aknin, L. B. et al. Prosocial spending and well-being: cross-cultural evidence for a psychological universal. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 104 , 635–652 (2013).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Hui, B. P. H., Ng, J. C. K., Berzaghi, E., Cunningham-Amos, L. A. & Kogan, A. Rewards of kindness? A meta-analysis of the link between prosociality and well-being. Psychol. Bull. 146 , 1084–1116 (2020).

Memmott-Elison, M. K., Holmgren, H. G., Padilla-Walker, L. M. & Hawkins, A. J. Associations between prosocial behavior, externalizing behaviors, and internalizing symptoms during adolescence: a meta-analysis. J. Adolesc. 80 , 98–114 (2020).

Simpson, B. & Willer, R. Beyond altruism: sociological foundations of cooperation and prosocial behavior. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 41 , 43–63 (2015).

Article Google Scholar

Taylor, L. K. The developmental peacebuilding model (DPM) of children’s prosocial behaviors in settings of intergroup conflict. Child. Dev. Perspect. 14 , 127–134 (2020).

Rifkin, J. The Empathic Civilization: the Race to Global Consciousness in a World in Crisis (TarcherPerigee, 2009).

Eisenberg, N. Emotion, regulation, and moral development. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 51 , 665–697 (2000). (2000).

Mayeroff, M. On Caring (Harper & Row, 1971).

Malti, T. & Davidov, M. (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Prosociality: Development, Mechanisms, Promotion (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2023).

Malti, T. & Dys, S. P. From being nice to being kind: development of prosocial behaviors. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 20 , 45–49 (2018).

De, W. & Suchak, M. Prosocial primates: selfish and unselfish motivations. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 365 , 2711–2722 (2010).

Malti, T. Kindness: a perspective from developmental psychology. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 18 , 629–657 (2021).

Davidov, M., Zahn‐Waxler, C., Roth‐Hanania, R. & Knafo, A. Concern for others in the first year of life: theory, evidence, and avenues for research. Child. Dev. Perspect. 7 , 126–131 (2013).

Bronfenbrenner, U. The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design (Harvard Univ. Press, 1979).

Malti, T. & Speidel, R. in The Cambridge Handbook of Prosociality: Development, Mechanisms, Promotion (eds Malti, T. & Davidov, M.) 577–599 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2023).

Jennings, B. Solidarity and care as relational practices. Bioethics. 32 , 553–561 (2018).

Buber, M. Ich und Du (I and Thou) (Lambert Schneider, 1923/1997).

Hanh, T. N. Creating True Peace: Ending Violence in Yourself, your Family, your Community, and the World (Simon and Schuster, 2004).

DeLoache, J. S., Pickard, M. B., & LoBue, V. in How Animals Affect Us: Examining the Influences of Human–Animal Interaction on Child Development and Human Health (eds McCardle, P. et al.) 85–99 (American Psychological Association, 2011).

Wilson, E. A. Biophilia. The Human Bond with Other Species (Harvard Univ. Press, 1984).

Summers, J. K., Vivian, D. N. & Summers, J. T. The role of interaction with nature in childhood development: an under-appreciated ecosystem service. Psychol. Behav. Sci. 8 , 142–150 (2019).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Malti, T. & Colasante, T. in Multidisciplinary Handbook of Character Virtue Development (eds Matthews, M. D. & Lerner, M.) 533–549 (Routledge, 2024).

Humboldt, A. V. Cosmos. A Sketch of a Physical Description of the Universe (John Hopkins Univ. Press, 1859).

Davidov, M. et al. Caring babies: concern for others in distress during infancy. Dev. Sci. 24 , e13016 (2021).

Svetlova, M., Nichols, S. R. & Brownell, C. A. Toddlers’ prosocial behavior: from instrumental to empathic to altruistic helping. Child. Dev. 81 , 1814–1827 (2010).

Eisenberg, N., Lennon, R. & Roth, K. Prosocial development: a longitudinal study. Dev. Psychol. 19 , 846–855 (1983).

Knafo, A., Zahn-Waxler, C., Van Hulle, C., Robinson, J. L. & Rhee, S. H. The developmental origins of a disposition toward empathy: genetic and environmental contributions. Emotion 8 , 737–752 (2008).

Nantel‐Vivier, A., Pihl, R. O., Côté, S. & Tremblay, R. E. Developmental association of prosocial behaviour with aggression, anxiety and depression from infancy to preadolescence. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 55 , 1135–1144 (2014).

Zahn-Waxler, C., Radke-Yarrow, M., Wagner, E. & Chapman, M. Development of concern for others. Dev. Psychol. 28 , 126–136 (1992). (1992).

Eisenberg, N. et al. Prosocial development in middle childhood: a longitudinal study. Dev. Psychol. 23 , 712–718 (1987).

Flynn, E., Ehrenreich, S. E., Beron, K. J. & Underwood, M. K. Prosocial behavior: long‐term trajectories and psychosocial outcomes. Soc. Dev. 24 , 462–482 (2015).

Kokko, K., Tremblay, R. E., Lacourse, E., Nagin, D. S. & Vitaro, F. Trajectories of prosocial behavior and physical aggression in middle childhood: links to adolescent school dropout and physical violence. J. Res. Adolesc. 16 , 403–428 (2006).

Paz, Y., Davidov, M., Orlitsky, T., Roth‐Hanania, R. & Zahn‐Waxler, C. Developmental trajectories of empathic concern in infancy and their links to social competence in early childhood. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 63 , 762–770 (2022).

Hart, M. A. Indigenous worldviews, knowledge, and research: the development of an Indigenous research paradigm. J. Indigenous Voices Soc. Work 1 , 1–16 (2010).

Google Scholar

Simon, M.-R. & Martin, H. in Handbook of Curriculum Theory and Research (eds Trifonas, P. P. & Jagger, S.) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82976-6_43-1 (Springer International Publishing, 2023).

Snow, K. & Obed, D. Toward Inummarik (well-balanced humans): an investigation of the role of land-based learning programs in public education. Polar Geogr. 45 , 260–274 (2022).

Asai, A., Okita, T., Enzo, A., Ohnishi, M. & Bito, S. Hope for the best and prepare for the worst: ethical concerns related to the introduction of healthcare artificial intelligence. Eubios J. Asian Int. Bioeth. 29 , 64–71 (2019).

Davidov, M. & Grusec, J. E. in The Cambridge Handbook of Prosociality: Development, Mechanisms, Promotion (eds Malti, T. & Davidov, M.) 361–387 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2023).

Hammond, S. I., Hill, R. P. & Edwards V. L. L. in The Cambridge Handbook of Prosociality: Development, Mechanisms, Promotion (eds Malti, T. & Davidov, M.) 442–458 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2023).

Hughes, C., McHarg, G. & Pike, A. in The Cambridge Handbook of Prosociality: Development, Mechanisms, Promotion (eds Malti, T. & Davidov, M.) 388–408 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2023).

McDonald, K. L., Dirks, M. A., Dunfield, K. A. & Hakim, E. A. in The Cambridge Handbook of Prosociality: Development, Mechanisms, Promotion (eds Malti, T. & Davidov, M.) 409–426 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2023).

Fromm, E. The Sane Society (Rinehart & Company, 1995).

Spinrad, T. L. & Gal, D. E. Fostering prosocial behavior and empathy in young children. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 20 , 40–44 (2018).

Davis, A. N. et al. A longitudinal study of paternal and maternal involvement and neighborhood risk on recent immigrant Latino/a youth prosocial behaviors. N. Dir. Child. Adolesc. Dev. 2021 , 13–30 (2021).

Lam, C. B., McHale, S. M., Lam, C. S., Chung, K. K. H. & Cheung, R. Y. M. Maternal differential treatment and child socioemotional competencies: a multi-informant longitudinal study of Chinese families. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 38 , 1046–1065 (2021).

Luengo Kanacri, B. P. et al. Longitudinal relations among maternal self-efficacy, maternal warmth, and early adolescents’ prosocial behavior. Parent. Sci. Pract. 21 , 24–46 (2021).

Oliver, B. R. & Pike, A. Mother–child positivity and negativity: family-wide and child-specific main effects and interactions predict child adjustment. Dev. Psychol. 54 , 744–756 (2018).

Peplak, J., Bobba, B., Hasegawa, M., Caravita, S. C. S. & Malti, T. The warm glow of kindness: developmental insight into children’s moral pride across cultures and its associations with prosocial behavior. Dev. Psychol. 59 , 2320–2332 (2023).

Yavuz, H. M., Colasante, T. & Malti, T. Parental warmth predicts more child pro‐social behaviour in children with better emotion regulation. Br. J. Dev. Psychol. 40 , 539–556 (2022).

Morris, A. S., Silk, J. S., Steinberg, L., Myers, S. S. & Robinson, L. R. The role of the family context in the development of emotion regulation. Soc. Dev. 16 , 361–38 (2007).

Scrimgeour, M. B., Davis, E. L. & Buss, K. A. You get what you get and you don’t throw a fit! Emotion socialization and child physiology jointly predict early prosocial development. Dev. Psychol. 52 , 102–116 (2016).

Blair, B. L. et al. Indirect effects of emotion regulation on peer acceptance and rejection: the roles of positive and negative social behaviors. Merrill-Palmer Q. 62 , 415–439 (2016).

Williams, K. E. & Berthelsen, D. The development of prosocial behaviour in early childhood: contributions of early parenting and self-regulation. Int. J. Early Child. 49 , 73–94 (2017).

Otterpohl, N. & Wild, E. Cross-lagged relations among parenting, children’s emotion regulation, and psychosocial adjustment in early adolescence. J. Clin. Child. Adolesc. Psychol. 44 , 93–108 (2015).

Colasante, T., Speidel, R. & Malti, T. Kindhearted: ethical guilt and ethical heart rate reactivity codevelop with aggression across childhood. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 174 , 108–118 (2022).

Song, J.-H., Colasante, T. & Malti, T. Helping yourself helps others: linking children’s emotion regulation to prosocial behavior through sympathy and trust. Emotion 18 , 518–527 (2018).

Rogers, C. in Psychology: A Study of a Science. Formulations of the Person and the Social Context (ed. Koch, S.) 184–256 (McGraw Hill, 1959).

Sommerville, J. A. et al. Infants’ prosocial behavior is governed by cost-benefit analyses. Cognition 177 , 12–20 (2018).

Eisenberg, N. et al. Consistency and development of prosocial dispositions: a longitudinal study. Child. Dev. 70 , 1360–1372 (1999).

Hoffman, M. L. in Handbook of Emotions (eds Lewis, M., Haviland-Jones, J. M. & Feldman Barrett, L.) 440–455 (Guilford Press, 2008).

Melis, A. P., Floedl, A. & Tomasello, M. Non-egalitarian allocations among preschool peers in a face-to-face bargaining task. PLoS ONE 10 , e0120494 (2015).

Carlo, G., Padilla-Walker, L. M. & Nielson, M. G. Longitudinal bidirectional relations between adolescents’ sympathy and prosocial behavior. Dev. Psychol. 51 , 1771–1777 (2015).

Carrizales, A., Branje, S. & Lannegrand, L. Disentangling between- and within-person associations between empathy and prosocial behaviours during early adolescence. J. Adoles. 93 , 114–125 (2021).

Damon, W. & Hart, D. The development of self-understanding from infancy through adolescence. Child. Dev. 53 , 841–864 (1982).

Kochanska, G., Gross, J. N., Lin, M. H. & Nichols, K. E. Guilt in young children: development, determinants, and relations with a broader system of standards. Child. Dev. 73 , 461–482 (2002).

Malti, T. Toward an integrated clinical-developmental model of guilt. Dev. Rev. 39 , 16–36 (2016).

Malti, T. et al. Children’s sympathy, guilt, and moral reasoning in helping, cooperation, and sharing: a 6-year longitudinal study. Child. Dev. 87 , 1783–1795 (2016).

Knafo-Noam, A. & Katsoty, D. in The Cambridge Handbook of Prosociality: Development, Mechanisms, Promotion (eds Malti, T. & Davidov, M.) 37–60 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2023).

Knafo-Noam, A., Vertsberger, D. & Israel, S. Genetic and environmental contributions to children’s prosocial behavior: brief review and new evidence from a reanalysis of experimental twin data. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 20 , 60–65 (2018).

Deater-Deckard, K., Dunn, J., O’Connor, T. G., Davies, L. & Golding, J. Using the step family genetic design to examine gene environment processes in child and family functioning. Marriage Fam. Rev. 33 , 131–156 (2008).

Thielmann, I., Spadaro, G. & Balliet, D. Personality and prosocial behavior: a theoretical framework and meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 146 , 30–90 (2020).

Caprara, G. V., Alessandri, G., Di Giunta, L., Panerai, L. & Eisenberg, N. The contribution of agreeableness and self‐efficacy beliefs to prosociality. Eur. J. Pers. 24 , 36–55 (2010).

Demedardi, M. J., Stephan, Y. & Monnier, C. On the importance of being agreeable: the impact of personality traits on prosocial lying in children. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 45 , 484–491 (2021).

Vukasović, T. & Bratko, D. Heritability of personality: a meta-analysis of behavior genetic studies. Psychol. Bull. 141 , 769–785 (2015).

Knafo, A. & Plomin, R. Prosocial behavior from early to middle childhood: genetic and environmental influences on stability and change. Dev. Psychol. 42 , 771–786 (2006).

Knafo, A., Israel, S. & Ebstein, R. P. Heritability of children’s prosocial behavior and differential susceptibility to parenting by variation in the dopamine receptor D4 gene. Dev. Psychopathol. 23 , 53–67 (2011).

Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. & Van Ijzendoorn, M. H. Differential susceptibility to rearing environment depending on dopamine-related genes: new evidence and a meta-analysis. Dev. Psychopathol. 23 , 39–52 (2011).

Belsky, J. War, trauma and children’s development: observations from a modern evolutionary perspective. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 32 , 260–271 (2008).

Haller, J., Harold, G., Sandi, C. & Neumann, I. D. Effects of adverse early‐life events on aggression and anti‐social behaviours in animals and humans. J. Neuroendocrinol. 26 , 724–738 (2014).

Pollak, S. D., Cicchetti, D., Hornung, K. & Reed, A. Recognizing emotion in faces: developmental effects of child abuse and neglect. Dev. Psychol. 36 , 679–688 (2000).

Keresteš, G. Children’s aggressive and prosocial behavior in relation to war exposure: testing the role of perceived parenting and child’s gender. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 30 , 227–239 (2006).

Song, K. H., Song, J. H. & Malti, T. In the face of adversity: refugee children’s traumatic stressors, trust, and prosocial behavior. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 48 , 49–58 (2024).

Nitschke, J. P., Forbes, P. A. G. & Lamm, C. Does stress make us more or less prosocial? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of acute stress on prosocial behaviours using economic games. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 142 , 104905–104905 (2022).

El-Khodary, B. & Samara, M. The mediating role of trait emotional intelligence, prosocial behaviour, parental support and parental psychological control on the relationship between war trauma, and PTSD and depression. J. Res. Pers. 81 , 246–256 (2019).

Lozada, F. T., Jagers, R. J., Smith, C. D., Bañales, J. & Hope, E. C. Prosocial behaviors of Black adolescent boys: an application of a sociopolitical development theory. J. Black Psychol. 43 , 493–516 (2017).

Vollhardt, J. R. Altruism born of suffering and prosocial behavior following adverse life events: a review and conceptualization. Soc. Justice Res. 22 , 53–97 (2009).

Staub, E. & Vollhardt, J. Altruism born of suffering: the roots of caring and helping after victimization and other trauma. Am. J. Orthopsychiat. 78 , 267–280 (2008).

Aydinli-Karakulak, A., Tepe, B., Nurcan, E. & Dimitrova, R. How prosocial behavior turns bad into good: an examination among Turkish–Bulgarian adolescents. Curr. Psychol. 40 , 3986–3996 (2021).

Davis, A. N. et al. Examining discrimination and familism values as longitudinal predictors of prosocial behaviors among recent immigrant adolescents. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 45 , 317–326 (2021).

Fike, K. J., Mattis, J. S., Nickodem, K. & Guillaume, C. Black adolescent altruism: exploring the role of racial discrimination and empathy. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 150 , 106990 (2023).

Nelson, C. A., Bhutta, Z. A., Harris, N. B., Danese, A. & Samara, M. Adversity in childhood is linked to mental and physical health throughout life. BMJ 371 , m3048 (2020).

Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D. & Becker, B. The construct of resilience: a critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child. Dev. 71 , 543–562 (2000).

Gunnar, M. R. & Bowen, M. What was learned from studying the effects of early institutional deprivation. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 210 , 173272 (2021).

Nelson, C. A. & Gabard-Durnam, L. J. Early adversity and critical periods: neurodevelopmental consequences of violating the expectable environment. Trends Neurosci. 43 , 133–143 (2020).

Schaefer, J. D., Cheng, T. W. & Dunn, E. C. Sensitive periods in development and risk for psychiatric disorders and related endpoints: a systematic review of child maltreatment findings. Lancet Psychiat. 9 , 978–991 (2022).

Flouri, E. & Kallis, C. Adverse life events and psychopathology and prosocial behavior in late adolescence: testing the timing, specificity, accumulation, gradient, and moderation of contextual risk. J. Am. Acad. Child. Adolesc. Psychiat. 46 , 1651–1659 (2007).

Malti, T. & Speidel, R. Prosocial cascades: understanding and nurturing the potential for positive developmental trajectories. Adv. Child. Dev. Behav. 64 , 189–216 (2022).

Dys, S. P., Zuffianò, A., Orsanska, V., Zaazou, N. & Malti, T. Children’s attentional orientation is associated with their kind emotions. Dev. Psychol. 58 , 1676–1686 (2022).

Speidel, R. et al. Refugee children’s social–emotional capacities: links to mental health upon resettlement and buffering effects on pre-migratory adversity. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health. 18 , 12180 (2021).

de Waal, F. The Age of Empathy: Nature’s Lessons for a Kinder Society (Harmony, 2009).

Piek, J. P. et al. Does the Animal Fun program improve social-emotional and behavioural outcomes in children aged 4–6 years? Hum. Mov. Sci. 43 , 155–163 (2015).

Schonert-Reichl, K. A., Smith, V., Zaidman-Zait, A. & Hertzman, C. Promoting children’s prosocial behaviors in school: impact of the “Roots of Empathy” program on the social and emotional competence of school-aged children. Sch. Ment. Health 4 , 1–21 (2012).

Berti, S. & Cigala, A. Mindfulness for preschoolers: effects on prosocial behavior, self-regulation and perspective taking. Early Educ. Dev. 33 , 38–57 (2022).

Caprara, G. V. et al. Positive effects of promoting prosocial behavior in early adolescence: evidence from a school-based intervention. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 38 , 386–396 (2014).

Mesurado, B., Distefano, M. J., Robiolo, G. & Richaud, M. C. The Hero program: development and initial validation of an intervention program to promote prosocial behavior in adolescents. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 36 , 2566–2584 (2019).

Menting, A. T. A., de Castro, B. O. & Matthys, W. Effectiveness of the Incredible Years parent training to modify disruptive and prosocial child behavior: a meta-analytic review. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 33 , 901–913 (2013).

Tolan, P. H., Hanish, L. D., McKay, M. M. & Dickey, M. H. Evaluating process in child and family interventions: aggression prevention as an example. J. Fam. Psychol. 16 , 220–236 (2002).

Malti, T., Chaparro, M. P., Zuffianò, A. & Colasante, T. School-based interventions to promote empathy-related responding in children and adolescents: a developmental analysis. J. Clin. Child. Adoles. Psychol. 45 , 718–731 (2016).

Kittay, E. F. Love’s Labor: Essays on Women, Equality and Dependence (Routledge, 1999).

Gruen, A. The Betrayal of the Self: The Fear of Autonomy in Men and Women (Grove Press, 1988).

Dahl, A. & Brownell, C. A. The social origins of human prosociality. Curr. Dir. Psychol. 28 , 274–279 (2019).

Malti, T. et al. “Who is worthy of my generosity?” Recipient characteristics and the development of children’s sharing. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 40 , 31–40 (2016).

Keller, M. A cross-cultural perspective on friendship. ISSBD Newsl. 46 , 10–11 (2004).

Malti T. & Noam, G. G. (eds) Where Youth Development Meets Mental Health and Education: the RALLY Approach. New Directions for Youth Development Vol. 120 (Jossey-Bass, 2008).

Masten, A. S. Resilience theory and research on children and families: past, present, promise. J. Fam. Theory Rev. 10 , 12–31 (2018).

Berndt, T. J. Friendship quality and social development. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 11 , 7–10 (2002).

Sebanc, A. M. The friendship features of preschool children: links with prosocial behavior and aggression. Soc. Dev. 12 , 249–268 (2003).

Asscheman, J. et al. Classroom peer preferences and the development of sharing behavior with friends and others. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 44 , 412–423 (2020).

Barry, C. M. & Wentzel, K. R. Friend influence on prosocial behavior: the role of motivational factors and friendship characteristics. Dev. Psychol. 42 , 153–163 (2006).

Luthar, S. S., Pao, L. S. & Kumar, N. L. COVID‐19 and resilience in schools: implications for practice and policy. Soc. Policy Rep. 34 , 1–65 (2021).

Gadsden, V. L., Ford, M. & Breiner, H. (eds) Parenting Matters: Supporting Parents of Children Ages 0–8 (The National Academies Press, 2016).

Al-Janaideh, R. et al. A community-based needs assessment of resettled Syrian refugee children and families in Canada. Refuge Can. J. Refugees https://doi.org/10.25071/1920-7336.41034 (2023).

Blewitt, C. et al. Integrating health and educational perspectives to promote preschoolers’ social and emotional learning: development of a multi-faceted program using an intervention mapping approach. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 17 , 575 (2020).

Saleme, P., Dietrich, T., Pang, B. & Parkinson, J. Design of a digital game intervention to promote socio-emotional skills and prosocial behavior in children. Multimodal Technol. Interact. 5 , 58 (2021).

Sun, J. et al. Building a space to dream: supporting indigenous children’s survivance through community‐engaged social and emotional learning. Child. Dev. 93 , 699–716 (2022).

Leff, S. S. et al. Using community-based participatory research to develop the PARTNERS youth violence prevention program. Prog. Commun. Health Partnersh. Res. Educ. Action. 4 , 207 (2010).

Bartholomew, L. K. et al. Planning Health Promotion Programs: An Intervention Mapping Approach 4th edn (Wiley, 2016).

Carlo, G. & Padilla‐Walker, L. Adolescents’ prosocial behaviors through a multidimensional and multicultural lens. Child. Dev. Perspect. 14 , 265–272 (2020).

Malti, T., Beelmann, A., Noam, G. G. & Sommer, S. Innovation and integrity in intervention research: conceptual issues, methodology, and knowledge translation. Prev. Sci. 19 , 271–273 (2018).

Gonzales, N. A., Lau, A., Murry, V. M., Pina, A. A. & Barrera, M. J. Culturally adapted preventive interventions for children and youth. Dev. Psychopathol. 4 , 874–993 (2016).

Feygina, I. & Henry, P. J. in The Oxford Handbook of Prosocial Behavior (eds Schroeder, D. A. & Graziano, W. G.) 188–208 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2015).

Luria, G., Cnaan, R. A. & Boehm, A. National culture and prosocial behaviors: results from 66 countries. Nonprofit Volunt. Sec Q. 44 , 1041–1065 (2015).

Borrego, J. Jr, Anhalt, K., Terao, S. Y., Vargas, E. C. & Urquiza, A. J. Parent–child interaction therapy with a Spanish-speaking family. Cogn. Behav. Pract. 13 , 121–133 (2006).

Matos, M., Torres, R., Santiago, R., Jurado, M. & Rodríguez, I. X. A. Adaptation of parent–child interaction therapy for Puerto Rican families: a preliminary study. Fam. Process. 45 , 205–222 (2006).

BigFoot, D. S. & Funderburk, B. W. Honoring children, making relatives: the cultural translation of parent–child interaction therapy for American Indian and Alaska native families. J. Psychoact. Drugs. 43 , 309–318 (2011).

McCabe, K. M., Yeh, M., Garland, A. F., Lau, A. S. & Chavez, G. The GANA program: a tailoring approach to adapting parent child interaction therapy for Mexican Americans. Edu. Treat Child. 28 , 111–129 (2005).

McCabe, K., Yeh, M., Lau, A. & Argote, C. B. Parent–child interaction therapy for Mexican Americans: results of a pilot randomized clinical trial at follow-up. Behav. Ther. 43 , 606–618 (2012).

Hall, G. C. N., Ibaraki, A. Y., Huang, E. R., Marti, C. N. & Stice, E. A meta-analysis of cultural adaptations of psychological interventions. Behav. Ther. 47 , 993–1014 (2016).

So, M. et al. Parent engagement in an original and culturally adapted evidence‐based parenting program, Legacy for Children™. Infant. Ment. Health J. 41 , 356–377 (2020).

Harb, C. A. & Taylor, M. J. The utility of community-based participatory research: increasing research engagement among minoritized ethnoracial groups. Psychiat. Rehab. J. 47 , 22–29 (2023).

Al-Janaideh, R., Speidel, R., Colasante, T. & Malti, T. Evaluating a social-emotional training program for refugee families and service providers: pilot study. JMIR Form. Res. 7 , e42606 (2023).

Malti, T. & Cheah, C. S. L. Towards complementarity: specificity and commonality in social-emotional development. Child. Dev. 92 , e1085–e1094 (2021).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This article was supported by an Alexander von Humboldt Professorship from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (awarded to T.M.), the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) (grant number 508598 awarded to T.M.), and the New Frontiers in Research Fund (grant number 513759 awarded to T.M.).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Humboldt Science Center for Child Development, Faculty of Education, Medical Faculty, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany

Centre for Child Development, Mental Health, and Policy, Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Tina Malti & Ruth Speidel

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors researched data for the article. All authors contributed substantially to discussion of the content. All authors wrote the article. T.M. reviewed and/or edited the manuscript before submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tina Malti .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature Reviews Psychology thanks the anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Malti, T., Speidel, R. Development of prosociality and the effects of adversity. Nat Rev Psychol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00328-7

Download citation

Accepted : 28 May 2024

Published : 18 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00328-7

Share this article

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

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

Bipolar Disorder
Therapy Center
When To See a Therapist
Types of Therapy
Best Online Therapy
Best Couples Therapy
Best Family Therapy
Managing Stress
Sleep and Dreaming
Understanding Emotions
Self-Improvement
Healthy Relationships
Student Resources
Personality Types
Guided Meditations
Verywell Mind Insights
2024 Verywell Mind 25
Mental Health in the Classroom
Editorial Process
Meet Our Review Board
Crisis Support

Types of Variables in Psychology Research

Examples of Independent and Dependent Variables

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

James Lacy, MLS, is a fact-checker and researcher.

Dependent and Independent Variables

Intervening Variables
Extraneous Variables
Controlled Variables
Confounding Variables
Operationalizing Variables

Frequently Asked Questions

Variables in psychology are things that can be changed or altered, such as a characteristic or value. Variables are generally used in psychology experiments to determine if changes to one thing result in changes to another.

Variables in psychology play a critical role in the research process. By systematically changing some variables in an experiment and measuring what happens as a result, researchers are able to learn more about cause-and-effect relationships.

The two main types of variables in psychology are the independent variable and the dependent variable. Both variables are important in the process of collecting data about psychological phenomena.

This article discusses different types of variables that are used in psychology research. It also covers how to operationalize these variables when conducting experiments.

Students often report problems with identifying the independent and dependent variables in an experiment. While this task can become more difficult as the complexity of an experiment increases, in a psychology experiment:

The independent variable is the variable that is manipulated by the experimenter. An example of an independent variable in psychology: In an experiment on the impact of sleep deprivation on test performance, sleep deprivation would be the independent variable. The experimenters would have some of the study participants be sleep-deprived while others would be fully rested.
The dependent variable is the variable that is measured by the experimenter. In the previous example, the scores on the test performance measure would be the dependent variable.

So how do you differentiate between the independent and dependent variables? Start by asking yourself what the experimenter is manipulating. The things that change, either naturally or through direct manipulation from the experimenter, are generally the independent variables. What is being measured? The dependent variable is the one that the experimenter is measuring.

Intervening Variables in Psychology

Intervening variables, also sometimes called intermediate or mediator variables, are factors that play a role in the relationship between two other variables. In the previous example, sleep problems in university students are often influenced by factors such as stress. As a result, stress might be an intervening variable that plays a role in how much sleep people get, which may then influence how well they perform on exams.

Extraneous Variables in Psychology

Independent and dependent variables are not the only variables present in many experiments. In some cases, extraneous variables may also play a role. This type of variable is one that may have an impact on the relationship between the independent and dependent variables.

For example, in our previous example of an experiment on the effects of sleep deprivation on test performance, other factors such as age, gender, and academic background may have an impact on the results. In such cases, the experimenter will note the values of these extraneous variables so any impact can be controlled for.

There are two basic types of extraneous variables:

Participant variables : These extraneous variables are related to the individual characteristics of each study participant that may impact how they respond. These factors can include background differences, mood, anxiety, intelligence, awareness, and other characteristics that are unique to each person.
Situational variables : These extraneous variables are related to things in the environment that may impact how each participant responds. For example, if a participant is taking a test in a chilly room, the temperature would be considered an extraneous variable. Some participants may not be affected by the cold, but others might be distracted or annoyed by the temperature of the room.

Other extraneous variables include the following:

Demand characteristics : Clues in the environment that suggest how a participant should behave
Experimenter effects : When a researcher unintentionally suggests clues for how a participant should behave

Controlled Variables in Psychology

In many cases, extraneous variables are controlled for by the experimenter. A controlled variable is one that is held constant throughout an experiment.

In the case of participant variables, the experiment might select participants that are the same in background and temperament to ensure that these factors don't interfere with the results. Holding these variables constant is important for an experiment because it allows researchers to be sure that all other variables remain the same across all conditions.

Using controlled variables means that when changes occur, the researchers can be sure that these changes are due to the manipulation of the independent variable and not caused by changes in other variables.

It is important to also note that a controlled variable is not the same thing as a control group . The control group in a study is the group of participants who do not receive the treatment or change in the independent variable.

All other variables between the control group and experimental group are held constant (i.e., they are controlled). The dependent variable being measured is then compared between the control group and experimental group to see what changes occurred because of the treatment.

Confounding Variables in Psychology

If a variable cannot be controlled for, it becomes what is known as a confounding variabl e. This type of variable can have an impact on the dependent variable, which can make it difficult to determine if the results are due to the influence of the independent variable, the confounding variable, or an interaction of the two.

Operationalizing Variables in Psychology

An operational definition describes how the variables are measured and defined in the study. Before conducting a psychology experiment , it is essential to create firm operational definitions for both the independent variable and dependent variables.

For example, in our imaginary experiment on the effects of sleep deprivation on test performance, we would need to create very specific operational definitions for our two variables. If our hypothesis is "Students who are sleep deprived will score significantly lower on a test," then we would have a few different concepts to define:

Students : First, what do we mean by "students?" In our example, let’s define students as participants enrolled in an introductory university-level psychology course.
Sleep deprivation : Next, we need to operationally define the "sleep deprivation" variable. In our example, let’s say that sleep deprivation refers to those participants who have had less than five hours of sleep the night before the test.
Test variable : Finally, we need to create an operational definition for the test variable. For this example, the test variable will be defined as a student’s score on a chapter exam in the introductory psychology course.

Once all the variables are operationalized, we're ready to conduct the experiment.

Variables play an important part in psychology research. Manipulating an independent variable and measuring the dependent variable allows researchers to determine if there is a cause-and-effect relationship between them.

A Word From Verywell

Understanding the different types of variables used in psychology research is important if you want to conduct your own psychology experiments. It is also helpful for people who want to better understand what the results of psychology research really mean and become more informed consumers of psychology information .

Independent and dependent variables are used in experimental research. Unlike some other types of research (such as correlational studies ), experiments allow researchers to evaluate cause-and-effect relationships between two variables.

Researchers can use statistical analyses to determine the strength of a relationship between two variables in an experiment. Two of the most common ways to do this are to calculate a p-value or a correlation. The p-value indicates if the results are statistically significant while the correlation can indicate the strength of the relationship.

In an experiment on how sugar affects short-term memory, sugar intake would be the independent variable and scores on a short-term memory task would be the independent variable.

In an experiment looking at how caffeine intake affects test anxiety, the amount of caffeine consumed before a test would be the independent variable and scores on a test anxiety assessment would be the dependent variable.

Just as with other types of research, the independent variable in a cognitive psychology study would be the variable that the researchers manipulate. The specific independent variable would vary depending on the specific study, but it might be focused on some aspect of thinking, memory, attention, language, or decision-making.

American Psychological Association. Operational definition . APA Dictionary of Psychology.

American Psychological Association. Mediator . APA Dictionary of Psychology.

Altun I, Cınar N, Dede C. The contributing factors to poor sleep experiences in according to the university students: A cross-sectional study . J Res Med Sci . 2012;17(6):557-561. PMID:23626634

Skelly AC, Dettori JR, Brodt ED. Assessing bias: The importance of considering confounding . Evid Based Spine Care J . 2012;3(1):9-12. doi:10.1055/s-0031-1298595

Evans, AN & Rooney, BJ. Methods in Psychological Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications; 2014.
Kantowitz, BH, Roediger, HL, & Elmes, DG. Experimental Psychology. Stamfort, CT: Cengage Learning; 2015.

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

Information

Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

Active Journals
Find a Journal
Proceedings Series
For Authors
For Reviewers
For Editors
For Librarians
For Publishers
For Societies
For Conference Organizers
Open Access Policy
Institutional Open Access Program
Special Issues Guidelines
Editorial Process
Research and Publication Ethics
Article Processing Charges
Testimonials
Preprints.org
SciProfiles
Encyclopedia

Article Menu

Subscribe SciFeed
Recommended Articles
Google Scholar
on Google Scholar
Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Deciphering the potential of probiotics in vaccines.

1. Introduction

2. brief background of probiotics, 3. the impact of probiotics on enhancing vaccine effectiveness, 4. probiotic-based vaccines in animal models, 4.1. probiotics in vaccines, 4.2. probiotic-based vaccine response in newborns, 4.3. probiotic-based vaccine response in adults, 5. probiotics and their function in different vaccine categories, 5.1. probiotics improve the immune system’s cellular and humoral responses, 5.2. probiotics enhance the level of antibodies, 5.3. probiotics proliferate immunocytes, 5.4. probiotics increase the production of cytokines, 5.5. probiotics and cell-mediated immunity, 5.6. probiotic-based bacterial ghost vaccination, 5.6.1. dna vaccines, 5.6.2. protein antigen vaccines, 6. future directions, 7. conclusions, author contributions, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

Kocourkova, A.; Honegr, J.; Kuca, K.; Danova, J. Vaccine ingredients: Components that influence vaccine efficacy. Mini-Rev. Med. Chem. 2017 , 17 , 451–466. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Carpenter, T.E. Evaluation of effectiveness of a vaccination program against an infectious disease at the population level. Am. J. Vet. Res. 2001 , 62 , 202–205. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
FAO; WHO. Health and nutritional properties of probiotics in food including powder milk with live lactic acid bacteria. In Cordoba, Argentina: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and World Health Organization Expert Consultation Report ; FAO: Rome, Italy; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
Morelli, L.; Capurso, L. FAO/WHO guidelines on probiotics: 10 years later. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2012 , 46 , S1–S2. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Fenster, K.; Freeburg, B.; Hollard, C.; Wong, C.; Rønhave Laursen, R.; Ouwehand, A.C. The production and delivery of probiotics: A review of a practical approach. Microorganisms 2019 , 7 , 83. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Hill, C.; Guarner, F.; Reid, G.; Gibson, G.R.; Merenstein, D.J.; Pot, B.; Morelli, L.; Canani, R.B.; Flint, H.J.; Salminen, S.; et al. Expert consensus docu-ment: The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appro-priate use of the term probiotic. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2014 , 11 , 506–514. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Metzger, R.N.; Krug, A.B.; Eisenächer, K. Enteric virome sensing—Its role in intestinal homeostasis and immunity. Viruses 2018 , 10 , 146. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Abd El-Gawad, I.A.; El-Sayed, E.M.; El-Zeini, H.M.; Hafez, S.A.; Saleh, F.A. Antibacterial activity of probiotic yoghurt and soy-yoghurt against Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. J. Nutr. Food Sci. 2014 , 4 , 1000303. [ Google Scholar ]
Bisanz, J.E.; Macklaim, J.M.; Gloor, G.B.; Reid, G. Bacterial metatranscriptome analysis of a probiotic yogurt using an RNA-Seq approach. Int. Dairy J. 2014 , 39 , 284–292. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Moineau-Jean, A.; Champagne, C.P.; Roy, D.; Raymond, Y.; LaPointe, G. Effect of Greek-style yoghurt manufacturing processes on starter and probiotic bacteria populations during storage. Int. Dairy J. 2019 , 93 , 35–44. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zheng, J.; Wittouck, S.; Salvetti, E.; Franz, C.M.; Harris, H.M.; Mattarelli, P.; O’toole, P.W.; Pot, B.; Vandamme, P.; Walter, J.; et al. A taxonomic note on the genus Lactobacillus : Description of 23 novel genera, emended description of the genus Lactobacillus Beijerinck 1901, and union of Lactobacillaceae and Leuconostocaceae. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 2020 , 70 , 2782–2858. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Prado, F.C.; Parada, J.L.; Pandey, A.; Soccol, C.R. Trends in non-dairy probiotic beverages. Food Res. Int. 2008 , 41 , 111–123. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Sanders, M.E. Probiotics in 2015: Their scope and use. J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2015 , 49 , S2–S6. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ojha, A.K.; Shah, N.P.; Mishra, V. Conjugal Transfer of Antibiotic Resistances in Lactobacillus spp. Curr. Microbiol. 2021 , 78 , 2839–2849. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Liévin-Le Moal, V.; Servin, A.L. Anti-infective activities of lactobacillus strains in the human intestinal microbiota: From probiotics to gastrointestinal anti-infectious biotherapeutic agents. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2014 , 27 , 167–199. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Raveschot, C.; Cudennec, B.; Coutte, F.; Flahaut, C.; Fremont, M.; Drider, D.; Dhulster, P. Production of bioactive peptides by Lactobacillus species: From gene to application. Front. Microbiol. 2018 , 9 , 2354. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Lei, W.T.; Shih, P.C.; Liu, S.J.; Lin, C.Y.; Yeh, T.L. Effect of probiotics and prebiotics on immune response to influenza vaccination in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutrients 2017 , 9 , 1175. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Makioka, Y.; Tsukahara, T.; Ijichi, T.; Inoue, R. Oral supplementation of Bifidobacterium longum strain BR-108 alters cecal microbiota by stimulating gut immune system in mice irrespectively of viability. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2018 , 82 , 1180–1187. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wu, B.-B.; Yang, Y.; Xu, X.; Wang, W.-P. Effects of Bifidobacterium supplementation on intestinal microbiota composition and the immune response in healthy infants. World J. Pediatr. 2016 , 12 , 177–182. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Soh, S.E.; Ong, D.Q.R.; Gerez, I.; Zhang, X.; Chollate, P.; Shek, L.P.-C.; Lee, B.W.; Aw, M. Effect of probiotic supplementation in the first 6 months of life on specific antibody responses to infant Hepatitis B vaccination. Vaccine 2010 , 28 , 2577–2579. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Przemska-Kosicka, A.; Childs, C.E.; Enani, S.; Maidens, C.; Dong, H.; Dayel, I.B.; Bin Dayel, I.; Tuohy, K.; Todd, S.; Gosney, M.A.; et al. Effect of a synbiotic on the response to seasonal influenza vaccination is strongly influenced by degree of immunosenescence. Immun. Ageing 2016 , 13 , 6. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Youngster, I.; Kozer, E.; Lazarovitch, Z.; Broide, E.; Goldman, M. Probiotics and the immunological response to infant vaccinations: A prospective, placebo controlled pilot study. Arch. Dis. Child. 2011 , 96 , 345–349. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Arsène, M.M.J.; Davares, A.K.L.; Andreevna, S.L.; Vladimirovich, E.A.; Carime, B.Z.; Marouf, R.; Khelifi, I. The use of probiotics in animal feeding for safe production and as potential alternatives to antibiotics. Vet. World 2021 , 14 , 319–328. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Alqazlan, N.; Astill, J.; Taha-Abdelaziz, K.; Nagy, É.; Bridle, B.; Sharif, S. Probiotic lactobacilli enhance immunogenicity of an inactivated H9N2 influenza virus vaccine in chickens. Viral Immunol. 2021 , 34 , 86–95. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
El-Shall, N.A.; Awad, A.M.; El-Hack, M.E.A.; Naiel, M.A.; Othman, S.I.; Allam, A.A.; Sedeik, M.E. The simultaneous administration of a probiotic or prebiotic with live Salmonella vaccine improves growth performance and reduces fecal shedding of the bacterium in Salmonella-challenged broilers. Animals 2019 , 10 , 70. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Michael, H.; Paim, F.C.; Langel, S.N.; Miyazaki, A.; Fischer, D.D.; Chepngeno, J.; Amimo, J.; Deblais, L.; Rajashekara, G.; Saif, L.J.; et al. Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 enhances innate and adaptive immune responses in a ciprofloxacin-treated defined-microbiota piglet model of human rotavirus infection. mSphere 2021 , 6 , e00074-21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Khor, C.S.; Tsuji, R.; Lee, H.Y.; Nor’e, S.S.; Sahimin, N.; Azman, A.S.; Tiong, V.; Hasandarvish, P.; Teoh, B.T.; Soh, Y.H.; et al. Lactococcus lactis strain plasma intake suppresses the incidence of dengue fever-like symptoms in healthy Malaysians: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Nutrients 2021 , 13 , 4507. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kazemifard, N.; Dehkohneh, A.; Baradaran Ghavami, S. Probiotics and probiotic-based vaccines: A novel approach for improving vaccine efficacy. Front. Med. 2022 , 9 , 940454. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Licciardi, P.V.; Ismail, I.H.; Balloch, A.; Mui, M.; Hoe, E.; Lamb, K.; Tang, M.L.K. Maternal supplementation with LGG reduces vaccine-specific immune responses in infants at high-risk of developing allergic disease. Front. Immunol. 2013 , 4 , 381. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Jespersen, L.; Tarnow, I.; Eskesen, D.; Morberg, C.M.; Michelsen, B.; Bügel, S.; Dragsted, L.O.; Rijkers, G.T.; Calder, P.C. Effect of Lactobacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei, L. casei 431 on immune response to influenza vaccination and upper respiratory tract infections in healthy adult volunteers: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2015 , 101 , 1188–1196. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Akatsu, H.; Arakawa, K.; Yamamoto, T.; Kanematsu, T.; Matsukawa, N.; Ohara, H.; Maruyama, M. Lactobacillus in Jelly Enhances the Effect of Influenza Vaccination in Elderly Individuals. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2013 , 61 , 1828–1830. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Xu, J.; Ren, Z.; Cao, K.; Li, X.; Yang, J.; Luo, X.; Zhu, L.; Wang, X.; Ding, L.; Liang, J.; et al. Boosting vaccine-elicited respiratory mucosal and systemic COVID-19 immunity in mice with the oral Lactobacillus plantarum. Front. Nutr. 2021 , 8 , 789242. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Rather, I.A.; Choi, S.B.; Kamli, M.R.; Hakeem, K.R.; Sabir, J.S.M.; Park, Y.H.; Hor, Y.-Y. Potential adjuvant therapeutic effect of Lactobacillus plantarum probio-88 postbiotics against SARS-COV-2. Vaccines 2021 , 9 , 1067. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Bavananthasivam, J.; Alizadeh, M.; Astill, J.; Alqazlan, N.; Matsuyama-Kato, A.; Shojadoost, B.; Taha-Abdelaziz, K.; Sharif, S. Effects of administration of probiotic lactobacilli on immunity conferred by the herpesvirus of turkeys vaccine against challenge with a very virulent Marek’s disease virus in chickens. Vaccine 2021 , 39 , 2424–2433. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Tsai, C.-Y.; Hu, S.-Y.; Santos, H.M.; Catulin, G.E.M.; Tayo, L.L.; Chuang, K.P. Probiotic supplementation containing Bacillus velezensis enhances expression of immune regulatory genes against pigeon circovirus in pigeons (Columba livia). J. Appl. Microbiol. 2021 , 130 , 1695–1704. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Vasiee, A.; Falah, F.; Sankian, M.; Tabatabaei-Yazdi, F.; Mortazavi, S.A. Oral immunotherapy using probiotic ice cream containing recombinant food-grade Lactococcus lactis which inhibited allergic responses in a BALB/c mouse model. J. Immunol. Res. 2020 , 2020 , 2635230. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Lépine, A.F.P.; Konstanti, P.; Borewicz, K.; Resink, J.W.; de Wit, N.J.; de Vos, P.; Smidt, H.; Mes, J.J. Combined dietary supplementation of long chain inulin and Lactobacillus acidophilus W37 supports oral vaccination efficacy against Salmonella Typhimurium in piglets. Sci. Rep. 2019 , 9 , 18017. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Xiang, Q.; Wu, X.; Pan, Y.; Wang, L.; Cui, C.; Guo, Y.; Zhu, L.; Peng, J.; Wei, H. Early-life intervention using fecal microbiota combined with probiotics promotes gut microbiota maturation, regulates immune system development, and alleviates weaning stress in piglets. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020 , 21 , 503. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Santos, F.D.S.; Ferreira, M.R.A.; Maubrigades, L.R.; Gonçalves, V.S.; de Lara, A.P.S.; Moreira, C.; Salvarani, F.M.; Conceição, F.R.; Leivas Leite, F.P. Bacillus toyonensis BCT-7112T transient supplementation improves vaccine efficacy in ewes vaccinated against Clostridium perfringens epsilon toxin. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2021 , 130 , 699–706. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Bermudez-Brito, M.; Plaza-Díaz, J.; Muñoz-Quezada, S.; Gómez-Llorente, C.; Gil, A. Probiotic mechanisms of action. Ann. Nutr. Metab. 2012 , 61 , 160–174. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kwon, H.-K.; Lee, C.-G.; So, J.-S.; Chae, C.-S.; Hwang, J.-S.; Sahoo, A.; Nam, J.H.; Rhee, J.H.; Hwang, K.-C.; Im, S.-H. Generation of regulatory dendritic cells and CD4 + Foxp3 + T cells by probiotics administration suppresses immune disorders. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010 , 107 , 2159–2164. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Pinto, M.G.V.; Gómez, M.R.; Seifert, S.; Watzl, B.; Holzapfel, W.H.; Franz, C.M. Lactobacilli stimulate the innate immune response and modulate the TLR expression of HT29 intestinal epithelial cells in vitro. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2009 , 133 , 86–93. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Abreu, M.T.; Fukata, M.; Arditi, M. TLR signaling in the gut in health and disease. J. Immunol. 2005 , 174 , 4453–4460. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Castillo, N.A.; Perdigón, G.; de Moreno de LeBlanc, A. Oral administration of a probiotic Lactobacillus modulates cytokine production and TLR expression improving the immune response against Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium infection in mice. BMC Microbiol. 2011 , 11 , 177. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Pang, I.K.; Iwasaki, A. Control of antiviral immunity by pattern recognition and the microbiome. Immunol. Rev. 2012 , 245 , 209–226. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Parada Venegas, D.; de la Fuente, M.K.; Landskron, G.; González, M.J.; Quera, R.; Dijkstra, G.; Harmsen, H.J.; Faber, K.N.; Hermoso, M.A. Short chain fatty acids (SCFAs)-mediated gut epithelial and immune regulation and its relevance for inflammatory bowel diseases. Front. Immunol. 2019 , 10 , 424615. [ Google Scholar ]
Boets, E.; Gomand, S.V.; Deroover, L.; Preston, T.; Vermeulen, K.; De Preter, V.; Hamer, H.M.; Van den Mooter, G.; De Vuyst, L.; Courtin, C.M.; et al. Systemic availability and metabolism of colonic-derived short-chain fatty acids in healthy subjects: A stable isotope study. J. Physiol. 2017 , 595 , 541–555. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Silva, Y.P.; Bernardi, A.; Frozza, R.L. The role of short-chain fatty acids from gut microbiota in gut-brain communication. Front. Endocrinol. 2020 , 11 , 508738. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
McNeil, N.I.; Cummings, J.H.; James, W.P. Short chain fatty acid absorption by the human large intestine. Gut 1978 , 19 , 819–822. [ Google Scholar ]
Trend, S.; Leffler, J.; Jones, A.P.; Cha, L.; Gorman, S.; Brown, D.A.; Breit, S.N.; Kermode, A.G.; French, M.A.; Ward, N.C.; et al. Associations of serum short-chain fatty acids with circulating immune cells and serum biomarkers in patients with multiple sclerosis. Sci. Rep. 2021 , 11 , 5244. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Neish, A.S.; Gewirtz, A.T.; Zeng, H.; Young, A.N.; Hobert, M.E.; Karmali, V.; Rao, A.S.; Madara, J.L. Prokaryotic regulation of epithelial responses by inhibition of IκB-α ubiquitination. Science 2000 , 289 , 1560–1563. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Thomas, C.M.; Versalovic, J. Probiotics-host communication: Modulation of signaling pathways in the intestine. Gut Microbes 2010 , 1 , 148–163. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kumar, A.; Wu, H.; Collier-Hyams, L.S.; Hansen, J.M.; Li, T.; Yamoah, K.; Pan, Z.-Q.; Jones, D.P.; Neish, A.S. Commensal bacteria modulate cullin-dependent signaling via generation of reactive oxygen species. EMBO J. 2007 , 26 , 4457–4466. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Lin, P.W.; Myers, L.E.; Ray, L.; Song, S.C.; Nasr, T.R.; Berardinelli, A.J.; Kundu, K.; Murthy, N.; Hansen, J.M.; Neish, A.S. Lactobacillus rhamnosus blocks inflammatory signaling in vivo via reactive oxygen species generation. Free. Radic. Biol. Med. 2009 , 47 , 1205–1211. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zhang, L.; Li, N.; Caicedo, R.; Neu, J. Alive and dead Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG decrease tumor necrosis factor-α–induced interleukin-8 production in caco-2 cells. J. Nutr. 2005 , 135 , 1752–1756. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Tien, M.-T.; Girardin, S.E.; Regnault, B.; Le Bourhis, L.; Dillies, M.-A.; Coppée, J.-Y.; Bourdet-Sicard, R.; Sansonetti, P.J.; Pédron, T. Anti-inflammatory effect of Lactobacillus casei on Shigella-infected human intestinal epithelial cells. J. Immunol. 2006 , 176 , 1228–1237. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Petrof, E.O.; Claud, E.C.; Sun, J.; Abramova, T.; Guo, Y.; Waypa, T.S.; He, S.M.; Nakagawa, Y.; Chang, E.B. Bacteria-free solution derived from Lactobacillus plantarum inhibits multiple NF-kappaB pathways and inhibits proteasome function. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 2009 , 15 , 1537–1547. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Petrof, E.O.; Kojima, K.; Ropeleski, M.J.; Musch, M.W.; Tao, Y.; De Simone, C.; Chang, E.B. Probiotics inhibit nuclear factor-κB and induce heat shock proteins in colonic epithelial cells through proteasome inhibition. Gastroenterology 2004 , 127 , 1474–1487. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Frick, J.S.; Schenk, K.; Quitadamo, M.; Kahl, F.; Köberle, M.; Bohn, E.; Aepfelbacher, M.; Autenrieth, I.B. Lactobacillus fermentum attenuates the proinflammatory effect of Yersinia enterocolitica on human epithelial cells. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 2007 , 13 , 83–90. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Bai, A.-P.; Ouyang, Q.; Zhang, W.; Wang, C.-H.; Li, S.-F. Probiotics inhibit TNF-α-induced interleukin-8 secretion of HT29 cells. World J. Gastroenterol. 2004 , 10 , 455. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Sokol, H.; Pigneur, B.; Watterlot, L.; Lakhdari, O.; Bermúdez-Humaran, L.G.; Gratadoux, J.-J.; Blugeon, S.; Bridonneau, C.; Furet, J.-P.; Corthier, G.; et al. Faecalibacterium prausnitzii is an anti-inflammatory commensal bacterium identified by gut microbiota analysis of Crohn disease patients. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008 , 105 , 16731–16736. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Wu, G.D.; Huang, N.; Wen, X.; Keilbaugh, S.A.; Yang, H. High-level expression of IκB-β in the surface epithelium of the colon: In vitro evidence for an immunomodulatory role. J. Leukoc. Biol. 1999 , 66 , 1049–1056. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Tao, Y.; Drabik, K.A.; Waypa, T.S.; Musch, M.W.; Alverdy, J.C.; Schneewind, O.; Chang, E.B.; Petrof, E.O. Soluble factors from Lactobacillus GG activate MAPKs and induce cytoprotective heat shock proteins in intestinal epithelial cells. Am. J. Physiol.-Cell Physiol. 2006 , 290 , C1018–C1030. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kojima, K.; Musch, M.W.; Ren, H.; Boone, D.L.; Hendrickson, B.A.; Ma, A.; Chang, E.B. Enteric flora and lymphocyte-derived cytokines determine expression of heat shock proteins in mouse colonic epithelial cells. Gastroenterology 2003 , 124 , 1395–1407. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Pant, N.; Marcotte, H.; Brüssow, H.; Svensson, L.; Hammarström, L. Effective prophylaxis against rotavirus diarrhea using a combination of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and antibodies. BMC Microbiol. 2007 , 7 , 86. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Mountzouris, K.C.; Tsitrsikos, P.; Palamidi, I.; Arvaniti, A.; Mohnl, M.; Schatzmayr, G.; Fegeros, K. Effects of probiotic inclusion levels in broiler nutrition on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, plasma immunoglobulins, and cecal microflora composition. Poult. Sci. 2010 , 89 , 58–67. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
La Ragione, R.M.; Narbad, A.; Gasson, M.J.; Woodward, M.J. In vivo characterization of Lactobacillus johnsonii FI9785 for use as a defined competitive exclusion agent against bacterial pathogens in poultry. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2004 , 38 , 197–205. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Taras, D.; Vahjen, W.; Macha, M.; Simon, O.; Performance, S.A. Influence of a probiotic Enterococcus faecium strain on development of the immune system of sows and piglets. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2006 , 113 , 159–166. [ Google Scholar ]
Paineau, D.; Carcano, D.; Leyer, G.; Darquy, S.; Alyanakian, M.-A.; Simoneau, G.; Bergmann, J.-F.; Brassart, D.; Bornet, F.; Ouwehand, A.C. Effects of seven potential probiotic strains on specific immune responses in healthy adults: A double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol. 2008 , 53 , 107–113. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Luiz, W.B.; Cavalcante, R.C.; Paccez, J.; Souza, R.D.; Sbrogio-Almeida, M.E.; Ferreira, R.C.; Ferreira, L.C. Boosting systemic and secreted antibody responses in mice orally immunized with recombinant Bacillus subtilis strains following parenteral priming with a DNA vaccine encoding the enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) CFA/I fimbriae B subunit. Vaccine 2008 , 26 , 3998–4005. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Lee, S.F.; Halperin, S.; Wang, H.; MacArthur, A. Oral colonization and immune responses to Streptococcus gordonii expressing a pertussis toxin S1 fragment in mice. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2002 , 208 , 175–178. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Perdigon, G.; Alvarez, S.; Rachid, M.; Agüero, G.; Gobbato, N. Immune system stimulation by probiotics. J. Dairy Sci. 1995 , 78 , 1597–1606. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Perdigón, G.; Alvarez, S.; de Ruiz Holgado, A.P. Immunoadjuvant activity of oral Lactobacillus casei: Influence of dose on the secretory immune response and protective capacity in intestinal infections. J. Dairy Res. 1991 , 58 , 485–496. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Matsuzaki, T.; Yamazaki, R.; Hashimoto, S.; Yokokura, T. The effect of oral feeding of Lactobacillus casei strain Shirota on immunoglobulin E production in mice. J. Dairy Sci. 1998 , 81 , 48–53. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Xu, Y.; Yuen, P.-W.; Lam, J.K.-W. Intranasal DNA vaccine for protection against respiratory infectious diseases: The delivery perspectives. Pharmaceutics 2014 , 6 , 378–415. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Rubio-Del-Campo, A.; Coll-Marqués, J.M.; Yebra, M.J.; Buesa, J.; Pérez-Martínez, G.; Monedero, V.; Rodríguez-Díaz, J. Noroviral P-particles as an in vitro model to assess the interactions of noroviruses with probiotics. PLoS ONE 2014 , 9 , e89586. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Kudela, P.; Paukner, S.; Mayr, U.B.; Cholujova, D.; Schwarczova, Z.; Sedlak, J.; Bizik, J.; Lubitz, W. Bacterial ghosts as novel efficient targeting vehicles for DNA delivery to the human monocyte-derived dendritic cells. J. Immunother. 2005 , 28 , 136–143. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Buddenborg, C.; Daudel, D.; Liebrecht, S.; Greune, L.; Humberg, V.; Schmidt, M.A. Development of a tripartite vector system for live oral immunization using a gram-negative probiotic carrier. Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2008 , 298 , 105–114. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Sahoo, A.; Mandal, A.K.; Dwivedi, K.; Kumar, V. A cross talk between the immunization and edible vaccine: Current challenges and future prospects. Life Sci. 2020 , 261 , 118343. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Sha, Z.; Shang, H.; Miao, Y.; Huang, J.; Niu, X.; Chen, R.; Hu, L.; Huang, H.; Wei, K.; Zhu, R. Recombinant Lactococcus Lactis expressing M1-HA2 fusion protein provides protective mucosal immunity against H9N2 avian influenza virus in chickens. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020 , 7 , 153. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
La Fata, G.; Weber, P.; Mohajeri, M.H. Probiotics and the gut immune system: Indirect regulation. Probiotics Antimicrob. Proteins 2018 , 10 , 11–21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Heeney, D.D.; Gareau, M.G.; Marco, M.L. Intestinal Lactobacillus in health and disease, a driver or just along for the ride? Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2018 , 49 , 140–147. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Livingston, M.; Loach, D.; Wilson, M.; Tannock, G.W.; Baird, M. Gut commensal Lactobacillus reuteri 100-23 stimulates an immunoregulatory response. Immunol. Cell Biol. 2010 , 88 , 99–102. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Hoffmann, M.; Rath, E.; Hölzlwimmer, G.; Quintanilla-Martinez, L.; Loach, D.; Tannock, G.; Haller, D. Lactobacillus reuteri 100-23 Transiently Activates Intestinal Epithelial Cells of Mice That Have a Complex Microbiota during Early Stages of Colonization13. J. Nutr. 2008 , 138 , 1684–1691. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Walter, J.; Britton, R.A.; Roos, S. Host-microbial symbiosis in the vertebrate gastrointestinal tract and the Lactobacillus reuteri paradigm. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011 , 108 (Suppl. S1), 4645–4652. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Andre, F.E.; Booy, R.; Bock, H.L.; Clemens, J.; Datta, S.K.; John, T.J.; Lee, B.W.; Lolekha, S.; Peltola, H.; Ruff, T.A.; et al. Vaccination greatly reduces disease, disability, death and inequity worldwide. Bull. World Health Organ. 2008 , 86 , 140–146. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Pulendran, B. Learning immunology from the yellow fever vaccine: Innate immunity to systems vaccinology. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2009 , 9 , 741–747. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Payton, T.; Girgenti, D.; Frenck, R.W.; Patterson, S.; Love, J.; Razmpour, A.; Sidhu, M.S.; Emini, E.A.; Gruber, W.C.; Scott, D.A. Immunogenicity, safety and tolerability of 3 lots of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine given with routine pediatric vaccinations in the United States. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 2013 , 32 , 871–880. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Dye, C. Making wider use of the world’s most widely used vaccine: Bacille Calmette–Guérin revaccination reconsidered. J. R. Soc. Interface 2013 , 10 , 20130365. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Ferreira, R.B.; Antunes, L.C.M.; Finlay, B.B. Should the human microbiome be considered when developing vaccines? PLoS Pathog. 2010 , 6 , e1001190. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Jamieson, A.M. Influence of the microbiome on response to vaccination. Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2015 , 11 , 2329–2331. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
MacFabe, D.F.; Cain, D.P.; Rodriguez-Capote, K.; Franklin, A.E.; Hoffman, J.E.; Boon, F.; Taylor, A.R.; Kavaliers, M.; Ossenkopp, K.-P. Neurobiological effects of intraventricular propionic acid in rats: Possible role of short chain fatty acids on the pathogenesis and characteristics of autism spectrum disorders. Behav. Brain Res. 2007 , 176 , 149–169. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Erny, D.; Hrabě de Angelis, A.L.; Jaitin, D.; Wieghofer, P.; Staszewski, O.; David, E.; Keren-Shaul, H.; Mahlakoiv, T.; Jakobshagen, K.; Buch, T.; et al. Host microbiota constantly control maturation and function of microglia in the CNS. Nat. Neurosci. 2015 , 18 , 965–977. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Land, M.H.; Rouster-Stevens, K.; Woods, C.R.; Cannon, M.L.; Cnota, J.; Shetty, A.K. Lactobacillus sepsis associated with probiotic therapy. Pediatrics 2005 , 115 , 178–181. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Sharifi-Rad, J.; Rodrigues, C.F.; Stojanović-Radić, Z.; Dimitrijević, M.; Aleksić, A.; Neffe-Skocińska, K.; Zielińska, D.; Kołożyn-Krajewska, D.; Salehi, B.; Prabu, S.M.; et al. Probiotics: Versatile bioactive components in promoting human health. Medicina 2020 , 56 , 433. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Nicaise, P.; Gleizes, A.; Forestier, F.; Quéro, A.M.; Labarre, C. Influence of intestinal bacterial flora on cytokine (IL-1, IL-6 and TNF-alpha) production by mouse peritoneal macrophages. Eur. Cytokine Netw. 1993 , 4 , 133–138. [ Google Scholar ]
Stein, E.; Inic-Kanada, A.; Belij, S.; Montanaro, J.; Bintner, N.; Schlacher, S.; Mayr, U.B.; Lubitz, W.; Stojanovic, M.; Najdenski, H.; et al. In vitro and in vivo uptake study of Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 bacterial ghosts: Cell-based delivery system to target ocular surface diseases. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013 , 54 , 6326–6333. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Walcher, P.; Mayr, U.B.; Azimpour-Tabrizi, C.; Eko, F.O.; Jechlinger, W.; Mayrhofer, P.; Alefantis, T.; Mujer, C.V.; DelVecchio, V.G.; Lubitz, W. Antigen discovery and delivery of subunit vaccines by nonliving bacterial ghost vectors. Expert Rev. Vaccines 2004 , 3 , 681–691. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Zhou, P.; Wu, H.; Chen, S.; Bai, Q.; Chen, X.; Chen, L.; Zeng, X.; Liu, L.; Chen, L. MOMP and MIP DNA-loaded bacterial ghosts reduce the severity of lung lesions in mice after Chlamydia psittaci respiratory tract infection. Immunobiology 2019 , 224 , 739–746. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Jiao, H.; Yang, H.; Zheng, W.; Zhang, Q.; Zhao, D.; Li, G. Enhancement of immune responses by co-administration of bacterial ghosts-mediated Neisseria gonorrhoeae DNA vaccines. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2021 , 130 , 1770–1777. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Jiao, H.; Yang, H.; Zhao, D.; Chen, J.; Zhang, Q.; Liang, J.; Yin, Y.; Kong, G.; Li, G. Design and immune characterization of a novel Neisseria gonorrhoeae DNA vaccine using bacterial ghosts as vector and adjuvant. Vaccine 2018 , 36 , 4532–4539. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Cao, J.; Zhu, X.-C.; Liu, X.-Y.; Yuan, K.; Zhang, J.-J.; Gao, H.-H.; Li, J.-N. An oral double-targeted DNA vaccine induces systemic and intestinal mucosal immune responses and confers high protection against Vibrio mimicus in grass carps. Aquaculture 2019 , 504 , 248–259. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Tuntufye, H.N.; Ons, E.; Pham, A.D.N.; Luyten, T.; Van Gerven, N.; Bleyen, N.; Goddeeris, B.M. Escherichia coli ghosts or live E. coli expressing the ferri-siderophore receptors FepA, FhuE, IroN and IutA do not protect broiler chickens against avian pathogenic E. coli (APEC). Vet. Microbiol. 2012 , 159 , 470–478. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Gong, S.; Nan, N.; Sun, Y.; He, Z.; Li, J.; Chen, F.; Li, T.; Ning, N.; Wang, J.; Li, Z.; et al. Protective immunity elicited by VP1 chimeric antigens of bacterial ghosts against hand-foot-and-mouth disease virus. Vaccines 2020 , 8 , 61. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Riedmann, E.M.; Lubitz, W.; McGrath, J.; Kyd, J.M.; Cripps, A.W. Effectiveness of engineering the nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae antigen Omp26 as an S-layer fusion in bacterial ghosts as a mucosal vaccine delivery. Hum. Vaccines 2011 , 7 (Suppl. S1), 99–107. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Sührer, I.; Langemann, T.; Lubitz, W.; Weuster-Botz, D.; Castiglione, K. A novel one-step expression and immobilization method for the production of biocatalytic preparations. Microb. Cell Factories 2015 , 14 , 180. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Langemann, T.; Koller, V.J.; Muhammad, A.; Kudela, P.; Mayr, U.B.; Lubitz, W. The bacterial ghost platform system: Production and applications. Bioeng. Bugs 2010 , 1 , 326–336. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Paukner, S.; Kohl, G.; Jalava, K.; Lubitz, W. Sealed bacterial ghosts—Novel targeting vehicles for advanced drug delivery of water-soluble substances. J. Drug Target. 2003 , 11 , 151–161. [ Google Scholar ]
Singh, K.; Kallali, B.; Kumar, A.; Thaker, V. Probiotics: A review. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 2011 , 1 , S287–S290. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Fijan, S. Microorganisms with claimed probiotic properties: An overview of recent literature. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014 , 11 , 4745–4767. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Santivarangkna, C.; Kulozik, U.; Foerst, P. Inactivation mechanisms of lactic acid starter cultures preserved by drying processes. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2008 , 105 , 1–13. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Boyle, R.J.; Robins-Browne, R.M.; Tang, M.L. Probiotic use in clinical practice: What are the risks? Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2006 , 83 , 1256–1264. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Arora, M.; Sharma, S.; Baldi, A. Comparative insight of regulatory guidelines for probiotics in USA, India and Malaysia: A critical review. Int. J. Biotechnol. Wellness Ind. 2013 , 2 , 51. [ Google Scholar ]
Jones, K. Probiotics: Preventing Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhea. J. Spec. Pediatr. Nurs. 2010 , 15 , 160–162. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Li, H.; Limenitakis, J.P.; Fuhrer, T.; Geuking, M.B.; Lawson, M.A.; Wyss, M.; Brugiroux, S.; Keller, I.; Macpherson, J.A.; Rupp, S.; et al. The outer mucus layer hosts a distinct intestinal microbial niche. Nat. Commun. 2015 , 6 , 8292. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Bermudez-Humaran, L.G.; Kharrat, P.; Chatel, J.-M.; Langella, P. Lactococci and lactobacilli as mucosal delivery vectors for therapeutic proteins and DNA vaccines. Microb. Cell Factories 2013 , 12 , S4. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Levine, M.M.; Robins-Browne, R.M.; Bavari, S. Progress in Vaccines for Enteric Diseases. Safety and Immunogenicity of Live Oral Cholera Vaccine Strain CVD 103-HgR in Streptomycin-Dependent Rabbits. Infect. Immun. 2016 , 84 , 252–257. [ Google Scholar ]
Lavelle, E.C.; Ward, R.W.; Mestecky, J. Perspective: Novel strategies for mucosal vaccination. Immunol. Rev. 2010 , 239 , 102–118. [ Google Scholar ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Study	Probiotic Bacteria	Role	Vaccine Type	Key Findings
Lei et al. [ ]	Lactobacillus casei, Bifidobacterium longum	Adjuvant	Influenza	Enhanced seroconversion and seroprotection rates in vaccinated individuals.
Soh et al. [ ]	Bifidobacterium longum BL999, Lactobacillus rhamnosus	Adjuvant	Hepatitis B	Augmented antibody responses post-vaccination.
Przemska-Kosicka et al. [ ]	Bifidobacterium longum infantis, Lactobacillus paracasei	Adjuvant	Seasonal influenza	Increased total antibody titers and seroprotection rates.
Makioka et al. [ ]	Bifidobacterium species	Adjuvant	General	Stimulation of oral and systemic immune responses.
Wu et al. [ ]	Bifidobacterium longum BB536	Candidate	General	Increased proportion of IFN-γ-secreting cells relative to IL-4.

Probiotic Strain	Animal	Vaccine	Probiotics and Their Effects on the Response to Vaccines	Reference
L. plantarum GUANKE (LPG)	Mice	SARS-CoV-2 vaccine	Increased neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies within hours. SARS-CoV-2 vaccine increased specific neutralizing antibodies within 24 h.	[ ]
Lactobacillus plantarum Probio-88	In vitro and in silico study	SARS-CoV-2 infection	In the spleen, MHC II expression on macrophages and B cells is elevated, the number of CD4+CD25+ T regulatory cells is reduced, IFN-α levels are higher at 21 dpi, and TGF-β4 expression is decreased.	[ ]
Lactobacillus	Chickens	Herpes virus vaccine from turkeys	The findings reveal an upregulation of MHC II expression on macrophages and B cells within the spleen, accompanied by a decrease in the number of CD4+CD25+ T regulatory cells. Moreover, there is heightened expression of IFN-α at 21 days post-infection (dpi), coupled with a reduction in TGF-β4 expression.	[ ]
Bacillus velezensis	Pigeons	Pigeon circovirus	There is a significant reduction in PiCV viral load in the feces and spleens of pigeons, along with up-regulation of IFN-γ, Mx1, STAT1, TLR2, and TLR4 gene expression.	[ ]
Lactococcus lactis NZ1330	BALB/c Mouse Model	Allergy to Amaranthus retroflexus pollens	In addition to reducing serum IgE levels, enhanced Th1 and Treg responses are the best ways to improve allergies.	[ ]
L. acidophilus; L. plantarum; B. subtilis; B. licheniformis	Broiler chickens	Salmonella Enteritidis vaccine	The detrimental impacts of the live vaccine on growth performance are mitigated, leading to a decrease in mortality rate, fecal shedding, and re-isolation of Salmonella Enteritidis (SE) from vital organs such as the liver, spleen, heart, and cecum.	[ ]
L.acidophilus W37	Piglets	Salmonella Typhimurium strains	Vaccination efficacy doubled, correlating with a higher relative abundance of Prevotellaceae and a lower relative abundance of Lactobacillaceae in fecal samples. Additionally, an increase in the relative abundance of fecal lactobacilli was associated with firmer fecal consistency.	[ ]
Fecal microbiome+ Clostridium butyricum and Saccharomyces boulardii	Gn piglets	-	The observed effects include increased plasma concentrations of IL-23, IL-17, and IL-22, alongside elevated levels of anti-M.hyo and anti-PCV2 antibodies. Moreover, there are reductions in inflammation and oxidative-stress-induced damage, coupled with enhancements in intestinal barrier function.	[ ]
B. toyonensis BCT-7112T	Ewes of the Corriedale sheep	Recombinant Clostridium perfringens epsilon toxin	Several cytokines and transcription factors have been increased, including total IgG anti-rETX and isotypes IgG1 and IgG2, as well as Bcl6 mRNA.	[ ]
Saccharomyces boulardii	Sheep	Clostridium chauvoei vaccine	There were 24- and 14-fold increases in total IgG levels, as well as specific IgG, IgG1, and IgG2 titers. Further transcription of IFNs, ILs, and Bcl6 mRNAs was observed.	[ ]

Probacteria	Species	Effect	References
Lactobacillus casei Shirota, oral (heat-killed)	Rodent	Inhibited splenocyte immunoglobulin (Ig)E production in vitro and reduced serum IgE levels	[ ]
L. casei, oral (live)	Rodent	Increased secretory IgA (sIgA) levels and reduced incidence of enteric infections	[ ]
L. acidophilus + Peptostreptococcus, oral (live)	Rodent	Reduced translocation and elevated levels of anti-E. coli IgM and IgE	[ ]

The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

Xu, C.; Aqib, A.I.; Fatima, M.; Muneer, S.; Zaheer, T.; Peng, S.; Ibrahim, E.H.; Li, K. Deciphering the Potential of Probiotics in Vaccines. Vaccines 2024 , 12 , 711. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines12070711

Xu C, Aqib AI, Fatima M, Muneer S, Zaheer T, Peng S, Ibrahim EH, Li K. Deciphering the Potential of Probiotics in Vaccines. Vaccines . 2024; 12(7):711. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines12070711

Xu, Chang, Amjad Islam Aqib, Mahreen Fatima, Sadia Muneer, Tean Zaheer, Song Peng, Essam H. Ibrahim, and Kun Li. 2024. "Deciphering the Potential of Probiotics in Vaccines" Vaccines 12, no. 7: 711. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines12070711

Article Metrics

Further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

COMMENTS

Research Hypothesis In Psychology: Types, & Examples
Examples. 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.
Hypothesis: Definition, Examples, and Types
This article explores how a hypothesis is used in psychology research, how to write a good hypothesis, and the different types of hypotheses you might use. The Hypothesis in the Scientific Method In the scientific method , whether it involves research in psychology, biology, or some other area, a hypothesis represents what the researchers think ...
What is a Hypothesis
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.".
Research Hypothesis: Definition, Types, Examples and Quick Tips
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.
Research Methods In Psychology
Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc. Research methods in psychology are systematic procedures used to observe, describe, predict, and explain behavior and mental processes. They include experiments, surveys, case studies, and naturalistic observations, ensuring data collection is objective and reliable to understand and explain psychological phenomena.
2.4 Developing a Hypothesis
Theories and Hypotheses. Before describing how to develop a hypothesis it is imporant to distinguish betwee a theory and a hypothesis. A theory is a coherent explanation or interpretation of one or more phenomena.Although theories can take a variety of forms, one thing they have in common is that they go beyond the phenomena they explain by including variables, structures, processes, functions ...
Overview of the Types of Research in Psychology
Psychology research can usually be classified as one of three major types. 1. Causal or Experimental Research. When most people think of scientific experimentation, research on cause and effect is most often brought to mind. Experiments on causal relationships investigate the effect of one or more variables on one or more outcome variables.
Developing a Hypothesis
Theories and Hypotheses. Before describing how to develop a hypothesis, it is important to distinguish between a theory and a hypothesis. A theory is a coherent explanation or interpretation of one or more phenomena. Although theories can take a variety of forms, one thing they have in common is that they go beyond the phenomena they explain by including variables, structures, processes ...
Chapter 3: From Theory to Hypothesis
A researcher begins with a set of phenomena and either constructs a theory to explain or interpret them or chooses an existing theory to work with. He or she then makes a prediction about some new phenomenon that should be observed if the theory is correct. Again, this prediction is called a hypothesis.
Aims and Hypotheses
Hypotheses. A hypothesis (plural hypotheses) is a precise, testable statement of what the researchers predict will be the outcome of the study. This usually involves proposing a possible relationship between two variables: the independent variable (what the researcher changes) and the dependant variable (what the research measures).
Aims and Hypotheses
The theory attempting to explain an observation will help to inform hypotheses - predictions of an investigation's outcome that make specific reference to the independent variables (IVs) manipulated and dependent variables (DVs) measured by the researchers. There are two types of hypothesis: H1 - The Research Hypothesis.
Aims And Hypotheses, Directional And Non-Directional
Three Different Hypotheses: (1) Directional Hypothesis: states that the IV will have an effect on the DV and what that effect will be (the direction of results). For example, eating smarties will significantly improve an individual's dancing ability. When writing a directional hypothesis, it is important that you state exactly how the IV will ...
Psychological Theories: Definition, Types, and Examples
Behavioral psychology, also known as behaviorism, is a theory of learning based on the idea that all behaviors are acquired through conditioning. Advocated by famous psychologists such as John B. Watson and B.F. Skinner, behavioral theories dominated psychology during the early half of the twentieth century.
Formulation of Hypotheses: Definition, Types & Example
There are different types of hypotheses: Null hypothesis, Alternative hypothesis (this is also known as the non-directional, two-tailed hypothesis), and Directional hypothesis (this is also known as the one-tailed hypothesis). ... An example of a null hypothesis in psychology is, there will be no observed difference in scores from a memory ...
13 Different Types of Hypothesis (2024)
There are 13 different types of hypothesis. These include simple, complex, null, alternative, composite, directional, non-directional, logical, empirical, statistical, associative, exact, and inexact. A hypothesis can be categorized into one or more of these types. However, some are mutually exclusive and opposites.
Hypotheses AO1 AO2
EXEMPLAR ESSAYHow to write a 8-mark answer. Assess how hypotheses are used in the Cognitive Approach. (8 marks) A 8-mark "apply" question awards 4 marks for describing the use of hypotheses (AO1) and 4 marks for applying the Cognitive Approach to this (AO2). You need a conclusion to get a mark in the top band (7-8 marks).
7.2.2 Hypothesis
The Experimental Hypothesis: Directional A directional experimental hypothesis (also known as one-tailed) predicts the direction of the change/difference (it anticipates more specifically what might happen); A directional hypothesis is usually used when there is previous research which support a particular theory or outcome i.e. what a researcher might expect to happen
Aims and Hypotheses: Explanation, Examples, Type & Psychology
The hypothesis is a predictive, testable statement about what the researcher expects to find in the study. The two types of hypotheses are null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis. For the scientific community of psychologists to accept a hypothesis, it must identify all variables, which researchers must operationalise.
Research in Psychology: Methods You Should Know
The Scientific Method in Psychology Research. The steps of the scientific method in psychology research are: Make an observation. Ask a research question and make predictions about what you expect to find. Test your hypothesis and gather data. Examine the results and form conclusions. Report your findings.
Independent and Dependent Variables
In research, a variable is any characteristic, number, or quantity that can be measured or counted in experimental investigations. One is called the dependent variable, and the other is the independent variable. In research, the independent variable is manipulated to observe its effect, while the dependent variable is the measured outcome.
8 Different Types of Hypotheses (Plus Essential Facts)
There are different types of hypotheses but crafting a good hypothesis can be tricky. A sound hypothesis should be logical, affirmative, clear, precise, quantifiable, or can be tested, and has a cause and effect factor. ... These hypotheses are often used in the field of psychology. A causal hypothesis looks at how manipulation affects events ...
Introducing the Intra-Individual Variability Hypothesis in Explaining
Conclusions: Based on our findings, we introduce the IIV hypothesis in explaining individual differences in language development. According to our hypothesis, inconsistency in the timing of cognitive processes, reflected by increased IIV in RTs, degrades learning different aspects of language, and results in individual differences in language abilities.
Hypothesis
Types of Hypothesis. A hypothesis is a statement that can be tested and is often used in scientific research to propose a relationship between two or more variables. Understanding the different types of hypotheses is essential for conducting effective research. Below are the main types of hypotheses: 1. Null Hypothesis (H0)
In Defense of Shame
Shame gets a bad rep these days. It appears to be some kind of psychological scapegoat. Allegedly, shame can explain why people feel really bad all the time or have bad relationships. It could be ...
Formulation of Hypotheses: Definition, Types & Example
There are different types of hypotheses: Null hypothesis, Alternative hypothesis (this is also known as the non-directional, two-tailed hypothesis), and Directional hypothesis (this is also known as the one-tailed hypothesis). ... An example of a null hypothesis in psychology is, there will be no observed difference in scores from a memory ...
Development of prosociality and the effects of adversity
Abstract. Understanding how children become kind and caring prosocial adults matters for the survival and thriving of humanity. However, adversity can impact children's prosocial potential in ...
Types of Variables in Psychology Research
The two main types of variables in psychology are the independent variable and the dependent variable. Both variables are important in the process of collecting data about psychological phenomena. This article discusses different types of variables that are used in psychology research. It also covers how to operationalize these variables when ...
Deciphering the Potential of Probiotics in Vaccines
The demand for vaccines, particularly those prepared from non-conventional sources, is rising due to the emergence of drug resistance around the globe. Probiotic-based vaccines are a wise example of such vaccines which represent new horizons in the field of vaccinology in providing an enhanced and diversified immune response. The justification for incorporating probiotics into vaccines lies in ...

What is a Hypothesis – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Types of Hypothesis

Research Hypothesis

Null Hypothesis

Alternative Hypothesis

Directional Hypothesis

Non-directional Hypothesis

Statistical Hypothesis

Composite Hypothesis

Empirical Hypothesis

Simple Hypothesis

Complex Hypothesis

Applications of Hypothesis

How to write a Hypothesis

Identify the Research Question

Conduct a Literature Review

Determine the Variables

Formulate the Hypothesis

Write the Null Hypothesis

Refine the Hypothesis

Examples of Hypothesis

Purpose of Hypothesis

When to use Hypothesis

Characteristics of Hypothesis

Advantages of Hypothesis

Limitations of Hypothesis

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

You may also like

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Data Interpretation – Process, Methods and...

Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and...

Thesis Statement – Examples, Writing Guide

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Ethical Considerations – Types, Examples and...

The Craft of Writing a Strong Hypothesis

Table of Contents

What is a Hypothesis?

Different Types of Hypotheses‌

1. Null hypothesis

2. Alternative hypothesis

3. Simple hypothesis

4. Complex hypothesis

5. Associative and casual hypothesis

6. Empirical hypothesis

7. Statistical hypothesis

Characteristics of a Good Hypothesis

Separating a Hypothesis from a Prediction

Finally, How to Write a Hypothesis

1. Be clear about your research question

2. Carry out a recce

3. Create a 3-dimensional hypothesis

4. Write the first draft

5. Proof your hypothesis

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

2. What is an example of hypothesis?

3. What is an example of null hypothesis?

4. What are the types of research?

5. How to write a hypothesis?

6. What are the 2 types of hypothesis?

7. Difference between research question and research hypothesis?

8. What is plural for hypothesis?

9. What is the red queen hypothesis?

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

11. When to reject null hypothesis?

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)

2.4 Developing a Hypothesis

Theories and Hypotheses

Theory Testing

Incorporating Theory into Your Research

Characteristics of a Good Hypothesis

Key Takeaways

Share This Book

10 Developing a Hypothesis

Theories and Hypotheses

Theory Testing

Incorporating Theory into Your Research