how to do the hypothesis in research

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

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

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

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

Table of Contents

What is a hypothesis ?  

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

What is a research hypothesis ?  

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

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

Characteristics of a good hypothesis  

Here are the characteristics of a good hypothesis :  

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

How to create an effective research hypothesis  

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

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

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

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

How to write a research hypothesis  

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

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

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

Population: athletes  

Independent variable: daily cold water showers  

Dependent variable: endurance  

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

Research hypothesis checklist  

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

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

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

Types of research hypothesis  

Different types of research hypothesis are used in scientific research:  

1. Null hypothesis:

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

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

2. Alternative hypothesis:

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

Example: “ The newly identified virus is zoonotic .”  

3. Directional hypothesis :

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

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

4. Non-directional hypothesis:

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

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

5. Simple hypothesis :

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

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

6 . Complex hypothesis :

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

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

7. Associative hypothesis:  

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

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

8 . Causal hypothesis:

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

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

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

Research hypothesis examples  

Here are some good research hypothesis examples :  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Importance of testable hypothesis  

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

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

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on research hypothesis  

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

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

2. When to reject null hypothesis ?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

9. Can research hypotheses be used in qualitative research?

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

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

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

Related Posts

What are the Best Research Funding Sources

Inductive vs. Deductive Research Approach

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Guide & Examples

How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Guide & Examples

Published on 6 May 2022 by Shona McCombes .

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

Table of contents

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

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

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

Variables in hypotheses

Hypotheses propose a relationship between two or more variables . An independent variable is something the researcher changes or controls. A dependent variable is something the researcher observes and measures.

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

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Step 1: ask a question.

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

Step 2: Do some preliminary research

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

At this stage, you might construct a conceptual framework to identify which variables you will study and what you think the relationships are between them. Sometimes, you’ll have to operationalise more complex constructs.

Step 3: Formulate your hypothesis

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

Step 4: Refine your hypothesis

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

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

Step 5: Phrase your hypothesis in three ways

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

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

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

Step 6. Write a null hypothesis

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

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

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

A research hypothesis is your proposed answer to your research question. The research hypothesis usually includes an explanation (‘ x affects y because …’).

A statistical hypothesis, on the other hand, is a mathematical statement about a population parameter. Statistical hypotheses always come in pairs: the null and alternative hypotheses. In a well-designed study , the statistical hypotheses correspond logically to the research hypothesis.

Cite this Scribbr article

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

McCombes, S. (2022, May 06). How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 21 August 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/hypothesis-writing/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, operationalisation | a guide with examples, pros & cons, what is a conceptual framework | tips & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples.

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

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

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

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

Research Hypothesis 101

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

What is a hypothesis?

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

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

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

Hypothesis: sleep impacts academic performance.

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

But that’s not good enough…

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

What is a research hypothesis?

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

Let’s take a look at these more closely.

Need a helping hand?

Hypothesis Essential #1: Specificity & Clarity

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

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

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

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

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

Hypothesis Essential #2: Testability (Provability)

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

For example, consider the hypothesis we mentioned earlier:

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

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

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

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

Defining A Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

What about the null hypothesis?

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

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

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

And there you have it – hypotheses in a nutshell. 

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

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

17 Comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

could you please elaborate it more

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

This is very helpful

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

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

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

this is very important note help me much more

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

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

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

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Korean Med Sci
• v.37(16); 2022 Apr 25

A Practical Guide to Writing Quantitative and Qualitative Research Questions and Hypotheses in Scholarly Articles

Edward barroga.

1 Department of General Education, Graduate School of Nursing Science, St. Luke’s International University, Tokyo, Japan.

Glafera Janet Matanguihan

2 Department of Biological Sciences, Messiah University, Mechanicsburg, PA, USA.

The development of research questions and the subsequent hypotheses are prerequisites to defining the main research purpose and specific objectives of a study. Consequently, these objectives determine the study design and research outcome. The development of research questions is a process based on knowledge of current trends, cutting-edge studies, and technological advances in the research field. Excellent research questions are focused and require a comprehensive literature search and in-depth understanding of the problem being investigated. Initially, research questions may be written as descriptive questions which could be developed into inferential questions. These questions must be specific and concise to provide a clear foundation for developing hypotheses. Hypotheses are more formal predictions about the research outcomes. These specify the possible results that may or may not be expected regarding the relationship between groups. Thus, research questions and hypotheses clarify the main purpose and specific objectives of the study, which in turn dictate the design of the study, its direction, and outcome. Studies developed from good research questions and hypotheses will have trustworthy outcomes with wide-ranging social and health implications.

INTRODUCTION

Scientific research is usually initiated by posing evidenced-based research questions which are then explicitly restated as hypotheses. 1 , 2 The hypotheses provide directions to guide the study, solutions, explanations, and expected results. 3 , 4 Both research questions and hypotheses are essentially formulated based on conventional theories and real-world processes, which allow the inception of novel studies and the ethical testing of ideas. 5 , 6

It is crucial to have knowledge of both quantitative and qualitative research 2 as both types of research involve writing research questions and hypotheses. 7 However, these crucial elements of research are sometimes overlooked; if not overlooked, then framed without the forethought and meticulous attention it needs. Planning and careful consideration are needed when developing quantitative or qualitative research, particularly when conceptualizing research questions and hypotheses. 4

There is a continuing need to support researchers in the creation of innovative research questions and hypotheses, as well as for journal articles that carefully review these elements. 1 When research questions and hypotheses are not carefully thought of, unethical studies and poor outcomes usually ensue. Carefully formulated research questions and hypotheses define well-founded objectives, which in turn determine the appropriate design, course, and outcome of the study. This article then aims to discuss in detail the various aspects of crafting research questions and hypotheses, with the goal of guiding researchers as they develop their own. Examples from the authors and peer-reviewed scientific articles in the healthcare field are provided to illustrate key points.

DEFINITIONS AND RELATIONSHIP OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

A research question is what a study aims to answer after data analysis and interpretation. The answer is written in length in the discussion section of the paper. Thus, the research question gives a preview of the different parts and variables of the study meant to address the problem posed in the research question. 1 An excellent research question clarifies the research writing while facilitating understanding of the research topic, objective, scope, and limitations of the study. 5

On the other hand, a research hypothesis is an educated statement of an expected outcome. This statement is based on background research and current knowledge. 8 , 9 The research hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a new phenomenon 10 or a formal statement on the expected relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable. 3 , 11 It provides a tentative answer to the research question to be tested or explored. 4

Hypotheses employ reasoning to predict a theory-based outcome. 10 These can also be developed from theories by focusing on components of theories that have not yet been observed. 10 The validity of hypotheses is often based on the testability of the prediction made in a reproducible experiment. 8

Conversely, hypotheses can also be rephrased as research questions. Several hypotheses based on existing theories and knowledge may be needed to answer a research question. Developing ethical research questions and hypotheses creates a research design that has logical relationships among variables. These relationships serve as a solid foundation for the conduct of the study. 4 , 11 Haphazardly constructed research questions can result in poorly formulated hypotheses and improper study designs, leading to unreliable results. Thus, the formulations of relevant research questions and verifiable hypotheses are crucial when beginning research. 12

CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Excellent research questions are specific and focused. These integrate collective data and observations to confirm or refute the subsequent hypotheses. Well-constructed hypotheses are based on previous reports and verify the research context. These are realistic, in-depth, sufficiently complex, and reproducible. More importantly, these hypotheses can be addressed and tested. 13

There are several characteristics of well-developed hypotheses. Good hypotheses are 1) empirically testable 7 , 10 , 11 , 13 ; 2) backed by preliminary evidence 9 ; 3) testable by ethical research 7 , 9 ; 4) based on original ideas 9 ; 5) have evidenced-based logical reasoning 10 ; and 6) can be predicted. 11 Good hypotheses can infer ethical and positive implications, indicating the presence of a relationship or effect relevant to the research theme. 7 , 11 These are initially developed from a general theory and branch into specific hypotheses by deductive reasoning. In the absence of a theory to base the hypotheses, inductive reasoning based on specific observations or findings form more general hypotheses. 10

TYPES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Research questions and hypotheses are developed according to the type of research, which can be broadly classified into quantitative and qualitative research. We provide a summary of the types of research questions and hypotheses under quantitative and qualitative research categories in Table 1 .

Research questions in quantitative research

In quantitative research, research questions inquire about the relationships among variables being investigated and are usually framed at the start of the study. These are precise and typically linked to the subject population, dependent and independent variables, and research design. 1 Research questions may also attempt to describe the behavior of a population in relation to one or more variables, or describe the characteristics of variables to be measured ( descriptive research questions ). 1 , 5 , 14 These questions may also aim to discover differences between groups within the context of an outcome variable ( comparative research questions ), 1 , 5 , 14 or elucidate trends and interactions among variables ( relationship research questions ). 1 , 5 We provide examples of descriptive, comparative, and relationship research questions in quantitative research in Table 2 .

Hypotheses in quantitative research

In quantitative research, hypotheses predict the expected relationships among variables. 15 Relationships among variables that can be predicted include 1) between a single dependent variable and a single independent variable ( simple hypothesis ) or 2) between two or more independent and dependent variables ( complex hypothesis ). 4 , 11 Hypotheses may also specify the expected direction to be followed and imply an intellectual commitment to a particular outcome ( directional hypothesis ) 4 . On the other hand, hypotheses may not predict the exact direction and are used in the absence of a theory, or when findings contradict previous studies ( non-directional hypothesis ). 4 In addition, hypotheses can 1) define interdependency between variables ( associative hypothesis ), 4 2) propose an effect on the dependent variable from manipulation of the independent variable ( causal hypothesis ), 4 3) state a negative relationship between two variables ( null hypothesis ), 4 , 11 , 15 4) replace the working hypothesis if rejected ( alternative hypothesis ), 15 explain the relationship of phenomena to possibly generate a theory ( working hypothesis ), 11 5) involve quantifiable variables that can be tested statistically ( statistical hypothesis ), 11 6) or express a relationship whose interlinks can be verified logically ( logical hypothesis ). 11 We provide examples of simple, complex, directional, non-directional, associative, causal, null, alternative, working, statistical, and logical hypotheses in quantitative research, as well as the definition of quantitative hypothesis-testing research in Table 3 .

Research questions in qualitative research

Unlike research questions in quantitative research, research questions in qualitative research are usually continuously reviewed and reformulated. The central question and associated subquestions are stated more than the hypotheses. 15 The central question broadly explores a complex set of factors surrounding the central phenomenon, aiming to present the varied perspectives of participants. 15

There are varied goals for which qualitative research questions are developed. These questions can function in several ways, such as to 1) identify and describe existing conditions ( contextual research question s); 2) describe a phenomenon ( descriptive research questions ); 3) assess the effectiveness of existing methods, protocols, theories, or procedures ( evaluation research questions ); 4) examine a phenomenon or analyze the reasons or relationships between subjects or phenomena ( explanatory research questions ); or 5) focus on unknown aspects of a particular topic ( exploratory research questions ). 5 In addition, some qualitative research questions provide new ideas for the development of theories and actions ( generative research questions ) or advance specific ideologies of a position ( ideological research questions ). 1 Other qualitative research questions may build on a body of existing literature and become working guidelines ( ethnographic research questions ). Research questions may also be broadly stated without specific reference to the existing literature or a typology of questions ( phenomenological research questions ), may be directed towards generating a theory of some process ( grounded theory questions ), or may address a description of the case and the emerging themes ( qualitative case study questions ). 15 We provide examples of contextual, descriptive, evaluation, explanatory, exploratory, generative, ideological, ethnographic, phenomenological, grounded theory, and qualitative case study research questions in qualitative research in Table 4 , and the definition of qualitative hypothesis-generating research in Table 5 .

Qualitative studies usually pose at least one central research question and several subquestions starting with How or What . These research questions use exploratory verbs such as explore or describe . These also focus on one central phenomenon of interest, and may mention the participants and research site. 15

Hypotheses in qualitative research

Hypotheses in qualitative research are stated in the form of a clear statement concerning the problem to be investigated. Unlike in quantitative research where hypotheses are usually developed to be tested, qualitative research can lead to both hypothesis-testing and hypothesis-generating outcomes. 2 When studies require both quantitative and qualitative research questions, this suggests an integrative process between both research methods wherein a single mixed-methods research question can be developed. 1

FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

Research questions followed by hypotheses should be developed before the start of the study. 1 , 12 , 14 It is crucial to develop feasible research questions on a topic that is interesting to both the researcher and the scientific community. This can be achieved by a meticulous review of previous and current studies to establish a novel topic. Specific areas are subsequently focused on to generate ethical research questions. The relevance of the research questions is evaluated in terms of clarity of the resulting data, specificity of the methodology, objectivity of the outcome, depth of the research, and impact of the study. 1 , 5 These aspects constitute the FINER criteria (i.e., Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, and Relevant). 1 Clarity and effectiveness are achieved if research questions meet the FINER criteria. In addition to the FINER criteria, Ratan et al. described focus, complexity, novelty, feasibility, and measurability for evaluating the effectiveness of research questions. 14

The PICOT and PEO frameworks are also used when developing research questions. 1 The following elements are addressed in these frameworks, PICOT: P-population/patients/problem, I-intervention or indicator being studied, C-comparison group, O-outcome of interest, and T-timeframe of the study; PEO: P-population being studied, E-exposure to preexisting conditions, and O-outcome of interest. 1 Research questions are also considered good if these meet the “FINERMAPS” framework: Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, Relevant, Manageable, Appropriate, Potential value/publishable, and Systematic. 14

As we indicated earlier, research questions and hypotheses that are not carefully formulated result in unethical studies or poor outcomes. To illustrate this, we provide some examples of ambiguous research question and hypotheses that result in unclear and weak research objectives in quantitative research ( Table 6 ) 16 and qualitative research ( Table 7 ) 17 , and how to transform these ambiguous research question(s) and hypothesis(es) into clear and good statements.

a These statements were composed for comparison and illustrative purposes only.

b These statements are direct quotes from Higashihara and Horiuchi. 16

a This statement is a direct quote from Shimoda et al. 17

The other statements were composed for comparison and illustrative purposes only.

CONSTRUCTING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

To construct effective research questions and hypotheses, it is very important to 1) clarify the background and 2) identify the research problem at the outset of the research, within a specific timeframe. 9 Then, 3) review or conduct preliminary research to collect all available knowledge about the possible research questions by studying theories and previous studies. 18 Afterwards, 4) construct research questions to investigate the research problem. Identify variables to be accessed from the research questions 4 and make operational definitions of constructs from the research problem and questions. Thereafter, 5) construct specific deductive or inductive predictions in the form of hypotheses. 4 Finally, 6) state the study aims . This general flow for constructing effective research questions and hypotheses prior to conducting research is shown in Fig. 1 .

Research questions are used more frequently in qualitative research than objectives or hypotheses. 3 These questions seek to discover, understand, explore or describe experiences by asking “What” or “How.” The questions are open-ended to elicit a description rather than to relate variables or compare groups. The questions are continually reviewed, reformulated, and changed during the qualitative study. 3 Research questions are also used more frequently in survey projects than hypotheses in experiments in quantitative research to compare variables and their relationships.

Hypotheses are constructed based on the variables identified and as an if-then statement, following the template, ‘If a specific action is taken, then a certain outcome is expected.’ At this stage, some ideas regarding expectations from the research to be conducted must be drawn. 18 Then, the variables to be manipulated (independent) and influenced (dependent) are defined. 4 Thereafter, the hypothesis is stated and refined, and reproducible data tailored to the hypothesis are identified, collected, and analyzed. 4 The hypotheses must be testable and specific, 18 and should describe the variables and their relationships, the specific group being studied, and the predicted research outcome. 18 Hypotheses construction involves a testable proposition to be deduced from theory, and independent and dependent variables to be separated and measured separately. 3 Therefore, good hypotheses must be based on good research questions constructed at the start of a study or trial. 12

In summary, research questions are constructed after establishing the background of the study. Hypotheses are then developed based on the research questions. Thus, it is crucial to have excellent research questions to generate superior hypotheses. In turn, these would determine the research objectives and the design of the study, and ultimately, the outcome of the research. 12 Algorithms for building research questions and hypotheses are shown in Fig. 2 for quantitative research and in Fig. 3 for qualitative research.

EXAMPLES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS FROM PUBLISHED ARTICLES

• EXAMPLE 1. Descriptive research question (quantitative research)
• - Presents research variables to be assessed (distinct phenotypes and subphenotypes)
• “BACKGROUND: Since COVID-19 was identified, its clinical and biological heterogeneity has been recognized. Identifying COVID-19 phenotypes might help guide basic, clinical, and translational research efforts.
• RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the clinical spectrum of patients with COVID-19 contain distinct phenotypes and subphenotypes? ” 19
• EXAMPLE 2. Relationship research question (quantitative research)
• - Shows interactions between dependent variable (static postural control) and independent variable (peripheral visual field loss)
• “Background: Integration of visual, vestibular, and proprioceptive sensations contributes to postural control. People with peripheral visual field loss have serious postural instability. However, the directional specificity of postural stability and sensory reweighting caused by gradual peripheral visual field loss remain unclear.
• Research question: What are the effects of peripheral visual field loss on static postural control ?” 20
• EXAMPLE 3. Comparative research question (quantitative research)
• - Clarifies the difference among groups with an outcome variable (patients enrolled in COMPERA with moderate PH or severe PH in COPD) and another group without the outcome variable (patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH))
• “BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) in COPD is a poorly investigated clinical condition.
• RESEARCH QUESTION: Which factors determine the outcome of PH in COPD?
• STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed the characteristics and outcome of patients enrolled in the Comparative, Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary Hypertension (COMPERA) with moderate or severe PH in COPD as defined during the 6th PH World Symposium who received medical therapy for PH and compared them with patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH) .” 21
• EXAMPLE 4. Exploratory research question (qualitative research)
• - Explores areas that have not been fully investigated (perspectives of families and children who receive care in clinic-based child obesity treatment) to have a deeper understanding of the research problem
• “Problem: Interventions for children with obesity lead to only modest improvements in BMI and long-term outcomes, and data are limited on the perspectives of families of children with obesity in clinic-based treatment. This scoping review seeks to answer the question: What is known about the perspectives of families and children who receive care in clinic-based child obesity treatment? This review aims to explore the scope of perspectives reported by families of children with obesity who have received individualized outpatient clinic-based obesity treatment.” 22
• EXAMPLE 5. Relationship research question (quantitative research)
• - Defines interactions between dependent variable (use of ankle strategies) and independent variable (changes in muscle tone)
• “Background: To maintain an upright standing posture against external disturbances, the human body mainly employs two types of postural control strategies: “ankle strategy” and “hip strategy.” While it has been reported that the magnitude of the disturbance alters the use of postural control strategies, it has not been elucidated how the level of muscle tone, one of the crucial parameters of bodily function, determines the use of each strategy. We have previously confirmed using forward dynamics simulations of human musculoskeletal models that an increased muscle tone promotes the use of ankle strategies. The objective of the present study was to experimentally evaluate a hypothesis: an increased muscle tone promotes the use of ankle strategies. Research question: Do changes in the muscle tone affect the use of ankle strategies ?” 23

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESES IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES

• EXAMPLE 1. Working hypothesis (quantitative research)
• - A hypothesis that is initially accepted for further research to produce a feasible theory
• “As fever may have benefit in shortening the duration of viral illness, it is plausible to hypothesize that the antipyretic efficacy of ibuprofen may be hindering the benefits of a fever response when taken during the early stages of COVID-19 illness .” 24
• “In conclusion, it is plausible to hypothesize that the antipyretic efficacy of ibuprofen may be hindering the benefits of a fever response . The difference in perceived safety of these agents in COVID-19 illness could be related to the more potent efficacy to reduce fever with ibuprofen compared to acetaminophen. Compelling data on the benefit of fever warrant further research and review to determine when to treat or withhold ibuprofen for early stage fever for COVID-19 and other related viral illnesses .” 24
• EXAMPLE 2. Exploratory hypothesis (qualitative research)
• - Explores particular areas deeper to clarify subjective experience and develop a formal hypothesis potentially testable in a future quantitative approach
• “We hypothesized that when thinking about a past experience of help-seeking, a self distancing prompt would cause increased help-seeking intentions and more favorable help-seeking outcome expectations .” 25
• “Conclusion
• Although a priori hypotheses were not supported, further research is warranted as results indicate the potential for using self-distancing approaches to increasing help-seeking among some people with depressive symptomatology.” 25
• EXAMPLE 3. Hypothesis-generating research to establish a framework for hypothesis testing (qualitative research)
• “We hypothesize that compassionate care is beneficial for patients (better outcomes), healthcare systems and payers (lower costs), and healthcare providers (lower burnout). ” 26
• Compassionomics is the branch of knowledge and scientific study of the effects of compassionate healthcare. Our main hypotheses are that compassionate healthcare is beneficial for (1) patients, by improving clinical outcomes, (2) healthcare systems and payers, by supporting financial sustainability, and (3) HCPs, by lowering burnout and promoting resilience and well-being. The purpose of this paper is to establish a scientific framework for testing the hypotheses above . If these hypotheses are confirmed through rigorous research, compassionomics will belong in the science of evidence-based medicine, with major implications for all healthcare domains.” 26
• EXAMPLE 4. Statistical hypothesis (quantitative research)
• - An assumption is made about the relationship among several population characteristics ( gender differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with ADHD ). Validity is tested by statistical experiment or analysis ( chi-square test, Students t-test, and logistic regression analysis)
• “Our research investigated gender differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with ADHD in a Japanese clinical sample. Due to unique Japanese cultural ideals and expectations of women's behavior that are in opposition to ADHD symptoms, we hypothesized that women with ADHD experience more difficulties and present more dysfunctions than men . We tested the following hypotheses: first, women with ADHD have more comorbidities than men with ADHD; second, women with ADHD experience more social hardships than men, such as having less full-time employment and being more likely to be divorced.” 27
• “Statistical Analysis
• ( text omitted ) Between-gender comparisons were made using the chi-squared test for categorical variables and Students t-test for continuous variables…( text omitted ). A logistic regression analysis was performed for employment status, marital status, and comorbidity to evaluate the independent effects of gender on these dependent variables.” 27

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESIS AS WRITTEN IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES IN RELATION TO OTHER PARTS

• EXAMPLE 1. Background, hypotheses, and aims are provided
• “Pregnant women need skilled care during pregnancy and childbirth, but that skilled care is often delayed in some countries …( text omitted ). The focused antenatal care (FANC) model of WHO recommends that nurses provide information or counseling to all pregnant women …( text omitted ). Job aids are visual support materials that provide the right kind of information using graphics and words in a simple and yet effective manner. When nurses are not highly trained or have many work details to attend to, these job aids can serve as a content reminder for the nurses and can be used for educating their patients (Jennings, Yebadokpo, Affo, & Agbogbe, 2010) ( text omitted ). Importantly, additional evidence is needed to confirm how job aids can further improve the quality of ANC counseling by health workers in maternal care …( text omitted )” 28
• “ This has led us to hypothesize that the quality of ANC counseling would be better if supported by job aids. Consequently, a better quality of ANC counseling is expected to produce higher levels of awareness concerning the danger signs of pregnancy and a more favorable impression of the caring behavior of nurses .” 28
• “This study aimed to examine the differences in the responses of pregnant women to a job aid-supported intervention during ANC visit in terms of 1) their understanding of the danger signs of pregnancy and 2) their impression of the caring behaviors of nurses to pregnant women in rural Tanzania.” 28
• EXAMPLE 2. Background, hypotheses, and aims are provided
• “We conducted a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate and compare changes in salivary cortisol and oxytocin levels of first-time pregnant women between experimental and control groups. The women in the experimental group touched and held an infant for 30 min (experimental intervention protocol), whereas those in the control group watched a DVD movie of an infant (control intervention protocol). The primary outcome was salivary cortisol level and the secondary outcome was salivary oxytocin level.” 29
• “ We hypothesize that at 30 min after touching and holding an infant, the salivary cortisol level will significantly decrease and the salivary oxytocin level will increase in the experimental group compared with the control group .” 29
• EXAMPLE 3. Background, aim, and hypothesis are provided
• “In countries where the maternal mortality ratio remains high, antenatal education to increase Birth Preparedness and Complication Readiness (BPCR) is considered one of the top priorities [1]. BPCR includes birth plans during the antenatal period, such as the birthplace, birth attendant, transportation, health facility for complications, expenses, and birth materials, as well as family coordination to achieve such birth plans. In Tanzania, although increasing, only about half of all pregnant women attend an antenatal clinic more than four times [4]. Moreover, the information provided during antenatal care (ANC) is insufficient. In the resource-poor settings, antenatal group education is a potential approach because of the limited time for individual counseling at antenatal clinics.” 30
• “This study aimed to evaluate an antenatal group education program among pregnant women and their families with respect to birth-preparedness and maternal and infant outcomes in rural villages of Tanzania.” 30
• “ The study hypothesis was if Tanzanian pregnant women and their families received a family-oriented antenatal group education, they would (1) have a higher level of BPCR, (2) attend antenatal clinic four or more times, (3) give birth in a health facility, (4) have less complications of women at birth, and (5) have less complications and deaths of infants than those who did not receive the education .” 30

Research questions and hypotheses are crucial components to any type of research, whether quantitative or qualitative. These questions should be developed at the very beginning of the study. Excellent research questions lead to superior hypotheses, which, like a compass, set the direction of research, and can often determine the successful conduct of the study. Many research studies have floundered because the development of research questions and subsequent hypotheses was not given the thought and meticulous attention needed. The development of research questions and hypotheses is an iterative process based on extensive knowledge of the literature and insightful grasp of the knowledge gap. Focused, concise, and specific research questions provide a strong foundation for constructing hypotheses which serve as formal predictions about the research outcomes. Research questions and hypotheses are crucial elements of research that should not be overlooked. They should be carefully thought of and constructed when planning research. This avoids unethical studies and poor outcomes by defining well-founded objectives that determine the design, course, and outcome of the study.

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

Author Contributions:

• Conceptualization: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Methodology: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Writing - original draft: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.
• Writing - review & editing: Barroga E, Matanguihan GJ.

How to Write a Hypothesis: A Step-by-Step Guide

Introduction

An overview of the research hypothesis, different types of hypotheses, variables in a hypothesis, how to formulate an effective research hypothesis, designing a study around your hypothesis.

The scientific method can derive and test predictions as hypotheses. Empirical research can then provide support (or lack thereof) for the hypotheses. Even failure to find support for a hypothesis still represents a valuable contribution to scientific knowledge. Let's look more closely at the idea of the hypothesis and the role it plays in research.

As much as the term exists in everyday language, there is a detailed development that informs the word "hypothesis" when applied to research. A good research hypothesis is informed by prior research and guides research design and data analysis , so it is important to understand how a hypothesis is defined and understood by researchers.

What is the simple definition of a hypothesis?

A hypothesis is a testable prediction about an outcome between two or more variables . It functions as a navigational tool in the research process, directing what you aim to predict and how.

What is the hypothesis for in research?

In research, a hypothesis serves as the cornerstone for your empirical study. It not only lays out what you aim to investigate but also provides a structured approach for your data collection and analysis.

Essentially, it bridges the gap between the theoretical and the empirical, guiding your investigation throughout its course.

What is an example of a hypothesis?

If you are studying the relationship between physical exercise and mental health, a suitable hypothesis could be: "Regular physical exercise leads to improved mental well-being among adults."

This statement constitutes a specific and testable hypothesis that directly relates to the variables you are investigating.

What makes a good hypothesis?

A good hypothesis possesses several key characteristics. Firstly, it must be testable, allowing you to analyze data through empirical means, such as observation or experimentation, to assess if there is significant support for the hypothesis. Secondly, a hypothesis should be specific and unambiguous, giving a clear understanding of the expected relationship between variables. Lastly, it should be grounded in existing research or theoretical frameworks , ensuring its relevance and applicability.

Understanding the types of hypotheses can greatly enhance how you construct and work with hypotheses. While all hypotheses serve the essential function of guiding your study, there are varying purposes among the types of hypotheses. In addition, all hypotheses stand in contrast to the null hypothesis, or the assumption that there is no significant relationship between the variables .

Here, we explore various kinds of hypotheses to provide you with the tools needed to craft effective hypotheses for your specific research needs. Bear in mind that many of these hypothesis types may overlap with one another, and the specific type that is typically used will likely depend on the area of research and methodology you are following.

Null hypothesis

The null hypothesis is a statement that there is no effect or relationship between the variables being studied. In statistical terms, it serves as the default assumption that any observed differences are due to random chance.

For example, if you're studying the effect of a drug on blood pressure, the null hypothesis might state that the drug has no effect.

Alternative hypothesis

Contrary to the null hypothesis, the alternative hypothesis suggests that there is a significant relationship or effect between variables.

Using the drug example, the alternative hypothesis would posit that the drug does indeed affect blood pressure. This is what researchers aim to prove.

Simple hypothesis

A simple hypothesis makes a prediction about the relationship between two variables, and only two variables.

For example, "Increased study time results in better exam scores." Here, "study time" and "exam scores" are the only variables involved.

Complex hypothesis

A complex hypothesis, as the name suggests, involves more than two variables. For instance, "Increased study time and access to resources result in better exam scores." Here, "study time," "access to resources," and "exam scores" are all variables.

This hypothesis refers to multiple potential mediating variables. Other hypotheses could also include predictions about variables that moderate the relationship between the independent variable and dependent variable .

Directional hypothesis

A directional hypothesis specifies the direction of the expected relationship between variables. For example, "Eating more fruits and vegetables leads to a decrease in heart disease."

Here, the direction of heart disease is explicitly predicted to decrease, due to effects from eating more fruits and vegetables. All hypotheses typically specify the expected direction of the relationship between the independent and dependent variable, such that researchers can test if this prediction holds in their data analysis .

Statistical hypothesis

A statistical hypothesis is one that is testable through statistical methods, providing a numerical value that can be analyzed. This is commonly seen in quantitative research .

For example, "There is a statistically significant difference in test scores between students who study for one hour and those who study for two."

Empirical hypothesis

An empirical hypothesis is derived from observations and is tested through empirical methods, often through experimentation or survey data . Empirical hypotheses may also be assessed with statistical analyses.

For example, "Regular exercise is correlated with a lower incidence of depression," could be tested through surveys that measure exercise frequency and depression levels.

Causal hypothesis

A causal hypothesis proposes that one variable causes a change in another. This type of hypothesis is often tested through controlled experiments.

For example, "Smoking causes lung cancer," assumes a direct causal relationship.

Associative hypothesis

Unlike causal hypotheses, associative hypotheses suggest a relationship between variables but do not imply causation.

For instance, "People who smoke are more likely to get lung cancer," notes an association but doesn't claim that smoking causes lung cancer directly.

Relational hypothesis

A relational hypothesis explores the relationship between two or more variables but doesn't specify the nature of the relationship.

For example, "There is a relationship between diet and heart health," leaves the nature of the relationship (causal, associative, etc.) open to interpretation.

Logical hypothesis

A logical hypothesis is based on sound reasoning and logical principles. It's often used in theoretical research to explore abstract concepts, rather than being based on empirical data.

For example, "If all men are mortal and Socrates is a man, then Socrates is mortal," employs logical reasoning to make its point.

Let ATLAS.ti take you from research question to key insights

Get started with a free trial and see how ATLAS.ti can make the most of your data.

In any research hypothesis, variables play a critical role. These are the elements or factors that the researcher manipulates, controls, or measures. Understanding variables is essential for crafting a clear, testable hypothesis and for the stages of research that follow, such as data collection and analysis.

In the realm of hypotheses, there are generally two types of variables to consider: independent and dependent. Independent variables are what you, as the researcher, manipulate or change in your study. It's considered the cause in the relationship you're investigating. For instance, in a study examining the impact of sleep duration on academic performance, the independent variable would be the amount of sleep participants get.

Conversely, the dependent variable is the outcome you measure to gauge the effect of your manipulation. It's the effect in the cause-and-effect relationship. The dependent variable thus refers to the main outcome of interest in your study. In the same sleep study example, the academic performance, perhaps measured by exam scores or GPA, would be the dependent variable.

Beyond these two primary types, you might also encounter control variables. These are variables that could potentially influence the outcome and are therefore kept constant to isolate the relationship between the independent and dependent variables . For example, in the sleep and academic performance study, control variables could include age, diet, or even the subject of study.

By clearly identifying and understanding the roles of these variables in your hypothesis, you set the stage for a methodologically sound research project. It helps you develop focused research questions, design appropriate experiments or observations, and carry out meaningful data analysis . It's a step that lays the groundwork for the success of your entire study.

Crafting a strong, testable hypothesis is crucial for the success of any research project. It sets the stage for everything from your study design to data collection and analysis . Below are some key considerations to keep in mind when formulating your hypothesis:

• Be specific : A vague hypothesis can lead to ambiguous results and interpretations . Clearly define your variables and the expected relationship between them.
• Ensure testability : A good hypothesis should be testable through empirical means, whether by observation , experimentation, or other forms of data analysis.
• Ground in literature : Before creating your hypothesis, consult existing research and theories. This not only helps you identify gaps in current knowledge but also gives you valuable context and credibility for crafting your hypothesis.
• Use simple language : While your hypothesis should be conceptually sound, it doesn't have to be complicated. Aim for clarity and simplicity in your wording.
• State direction, if applicable : If your hypothesis involves a directional outcome (e.g., "increase" or "decrease"), make sure to specify this. You also need to think about how you will measure whether or not the outcome moved in the direction you predicted.
• Keep it focused : One of the common pitfalls in hypothesis formulation is trying to answer too many questions at once. Keep your hypothesis focused on a specific issue or relationship.
• Account for control variables : Identify any variables that could potentially impact the outcome and consider how you will control for them in your study.
• Be ethical : Make sure your hypothesis and the methods for testing it comply with ethical standards , particularly if your research involves human or animal subjects.

Designing your study involves multiple key phases that help ensure the rigor and validity of your research. Here we discuss these crucial components in more detail.

Literature review

Starting with a comprehensive literature review is essential. This step allows you to understand the existing body of knowledge related to your hypothesis and helps you identify gaps that your research could fill. Your research should aim to contribute some novel understanding to existing literature, and your hypotheses can reflect this. A literature review also provides valuable insights into how similar research projects were executed, thereby helping you fine-tune your own approach.

Research methods

Choosing the right research methods is critical. Whether it's a survey, an experiment, or observational study, the methodology should be the most appropriate for testing your hypothesis. Your choice of methods will also depend on whether your research is quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods. Make sure the chosen methods align well with the variables you are studying and the type of data you need.

Preliminary research

Before diving into a full-scale study, it’s often beneficial to conduct preliminary research or a pilot study . This allows you to test your research methods on a smaller scale, refine your tools, and identify any potential issues. For instance, a pilot survey can help you determine if your questions are clear and if the survey effectively captures the data you need. This step can save you both time and resources in the long run.

Data analysis

Finally, planning your data analysis in advance is crucial for a successful study. Decide which statistical or analytical tools are most suited for your data type and research questions . For quantitative research, you might opt for t-tests, ANOVA, or regression analyses. For qualitative research , thematic analysis or grounded theory may be more appropriate. This phase is integral for interpreting your results and drawing meaningful conclusions in relation to your research question.

Turn data into evidence for insights with ATLAS.ti

Powerful analysis for your research paper or presentation is at your fingertips starting with a free trial.

How to Write a Research Hypothesis

• Research Process
• Peer Review

Since grade school, we've all been familiar with hypotheses. The hypothesis is an essential step of the scientific method. But what makes an effective research hypothesis, how do you create one, and what types of hypotheses are there? We answer these questions and more.

Updated on April 27, 2022

What is a research hypothesis?

General hypothesis.

Since grade school, we've all been familiar with the term “hypothesis.” A hypothesis is a fact-based guess or prediction that has not been proven. It is an essential step of the scientific method. The hypothesis of a study is a drive for experimentation to either prove the hypothesis or dispute it.

Research Hypothesis

A research hypothesis is more specific than a general hypothesis. It is an educated, expected prediction of the outcome of a study that is testable.

What makes an effective research hypothesis?

A good research hypothesis is a clear statement of the relationship between a dependent variable(s) and independent variable(s) relevant to the study that can be disproven.

Research hypothesis checklist

Once you've written a possible hypothesis, make sure it checks the following boxes:

• It must be testable: You need a means to prove your hypothesis. If you can't test it, it's not a hypothesis.
• It must include a dependent and independent variable: At least one independent variable ( cause ) and one dependent variable ( effect ) must be included.
• The language must be easy to understand: Be as clear and concise as possible. Nothing should be left to interpretation.
• It must be relevant to your research topic: You probably shouldn't be talking about cats and dogs if your research topic is outer space. Stay relevant to your topic.

How to create an effective research hypothesis

Pose it as a question first.

Start your research hypothesis from a journalistic approach. Ask one of the five W's: Who, what, when, where, or why.

A possible initial question could be: Why is the sky blue?

Do the preliminary research

Once you have a question in mind, read research around your topic. Collect research from academic journals.

If you're looking for information about the sky and why it is blue, research information about the atmosphere, weather, space, the sun, etc.

Write a draft hypothesis

Once you're comfortable with your subject and have preliminary knowledge, create a working hypothesis. Don't stress much over this. Your first hypothesis is not permanent. Look at it as a draft.

Your first draft of a hypothesis could be: Certain molecules in the Earth's atmosphere are responsive to the sky being the color blue.

Make your working draft perfect

Take your working hypothesis and make it perfect. Narrow it down to include only the information listed in the “Research hypothesis checklist” above.

Now that you've written your working hypothesis, narrow it down. Your new hypothesis could be: Light from the sun hitting oxygen molecules in the sky makes the color of the sky appear blue.

Write a null hypothesis

Your null hypothesis should be the opposite of your research hypothesis. It should be able to be disproven by your research.

In this example, your null hypothesis would be: Light from the sun hitting oxygen molecules in the sky does not make the color of the sky appear blue.

Why is it important to have a clear, testable hypothesis?

One of the main reasons a manuscript can be rejected from a journal is because of a weak hypothesis. “Poor hypothesis, study design, methodology, and improper use of statistics are other reasons for rejection of a manuscript,” says Dr. Ish Kumar Dhammi and Dr. Rehan-Ul-Haq in Indian Journal of Orthopaedics.

According to Dr. James M. Provenzale in American Journal of Roentgenology , “The clear declaration of a research question (or hypothesis) in the Introduction is critical for reviewers to understand the intent of the research study. It is best to clearly state the study goal in plain language (for example, “We set out to determine whether condition x produces condition y.”) An insufficient problem statement is one of the more common reasons for manuscript rejection.”

Characteristics that make a hypothesis weak include:

• Unclear variables
• Unoriginality
• Too general
• Too specific

A weak hypothesis leads to weak research and methods . The goal of a paper is to prove or disprove a hypothesis - or to prove or disprove a null hypothesis. If the hypothesis is not a dependent variable of what is being studied, the paper's methods should come into question.

A strong hypothesis is essential to the scientific method. A hypothesis states an assumed relationship between at least two variables and the experiment then proves or disproves that relationship with statistical significance. Without a proven and reproducible relationship, the paper feeds into the reproducibility crisis. Learn more about writing for reproducibility .

In a study published in The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India by Dr. Suvarna Satish Khadilkar, she reviewed 400 rejected manuscripts to see why they were rejected. Her studies revealed that poor methodology was a top reason for the submission having a final disposition of rejection.

Aside from publication chances, Dr. Gareth Dyke believes a clear hypothesis helps efficiency.

“Developing a clear and testable hypothesis for your research project means that you will not waste time, energy, and money with your work,” said Dyke. “Refining a hypothesis that is both meaningful, interesting, attainable, and testable is the goal of all effective research.”

Types of research hypotheses

There can be overlap in these types of hypotheses.

Simple hypothesis

A simple hypothesis is a hypothesis at its most basic form. It shows the relationship of one independent and one independent variable.

Example: Drinking soda (independent variable) every day leads to obesity (dependent variable).

Complex hypothesis

A complex hypothesis shows the relationship of two or more independent and dependent variables.

Example: Drinking soda (independent variable) every day leads to obesity (dependent variable) and heart disease (dependent variable).

Directional hypothesis

A directional hypothesis guesses which way the results of an experiment will go. It uses words like increase, decrease, higher, lower, positive, negative, more, or less. It is also frequently used in statistics.

Example: Humans exposed to radiation have a higher risk of cancer than humans not exposed to radiation.

Non-directional hypothesis

A non-directional hypothesis says there will be an effect on the dependent variable, but it does not say which direction.

Associative hypothesis

An associative hypothesis says that when one variable changes, so does the other variable.

Alternative hypothesis

An alternative hypothesis states that the variables have a relationship.

• The opposite of a null hypothesis

Example: An apple a day keeps the doctor away.

Null hypothesis

A null hypothesis states that there is no relationship between the two variables. It is posed as the opposite of what the alternative hypothesis states.

Researchers use a null hypothesis to work to be able to reject it. A null hypothesis:

• Can never be proven
• Can only be rejected
• Is the opposite of an alternative hypothesis

Example: An apple a day does not keep the doctor away.

Logical hypothesis

A logical hypothesis is a suggested explanation while using limited evidence.

Example: Bats can navigate in the dark better than tigers.

In this hypothesis, the researcher knows that tigers cannot see in the dark, and bats mostly live in darkness.

Empirical hypothesis

An empirical hypothesis is also called a “working hypothesis.” It uses the trial and error method and changes around the independent variables.

• An apple a day keeps the doctor away.
• Two apples a day keep the doctor away.
• Three apples a day keep the doctor away.

In this case, the research changes the hypothesis as the researcher learns more about his/her research.

Statistical hypothesis

A statistical hypothesis is a look of a part of a population or statistical model. This type of hypothesis is especially useful if you are making a statement about a large population. Instead of having to test the entire population of Illinois, you could just use a smaller sample of people who live there.

Example: 70% of people who live in Illinois are iron deficient.

Causal hypothesis

A causal hypothesis states that the independent variable will have an effect on the dependent variable.

Example: Using tobacco products causes cancer.

Final thoughts

Make sure your research is error-free before you send it to your preferred journal . Check our our English Editing services to avoid your chances of desk rejection.

Jonny Rhein, BA

See our "Privacy Policy"

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Hypothesis Testing | A Step-by-Step Guide with Easy Examples

Published on November 8, 2019 by Rebecca Bevans . Revised on June 22, 2023.

Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world using statistics . It is most often used by scientists to test specific predictions, called hypotheses, that arise from theories.

There are 5 main steps in hypothesis testing:

• State your research hypothesis as a null hypothesis and alternate hypothesis (H o ) and (H a  or H 1 ).
• Collect data in a way designed to test the hypothesis.
• Perform an appropriate statistical test .
• Decide whether to reject or fail to reject your null hypothesis.
• Present the findings in your results and discussion section.

Though the specific details might vary, the procedure you will use when testing a hypothesis will always follow some version of these steps.

Table of contents

Step 1: state your null and alternate hypothesis, step 2: collect data, step 3: perform a statistical test, step 4: decide whether to reject or fail to reject your null hypothesis, step 5: present your findings, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about hypothesis testing.

After developing your initial research hypothesis (the prediction that you want to investigate), it is important to restate it as a null (H o ) and alternate (H a ) hypothesis so that you can test it mathematically.

The alternate hypothesis is usually your initial hypothesis that predicts a relationship between variables. The null hypothesis is a prediction of no relationship between the variables you are interested in.

• H 0 : Men are, on average, not taller than women. H a : Men are, on average, taller than women.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

For a statistical test to be valid , it is important to perform sampling and collect data in a way that is designed to test your hypothesis. If your data are not representative, then you cannot make statistical inferences about the population you are interested in.

There are a variety of statistical tests available, but they are all based on the comparison of within-group variance (how spread out the data is within a category) versus between-group variance (how different the categories are from one another).

If the between-group variance is large enough that there is little or no overlap between groups, then your statistical test will reflect that by showing a low p -value . This means it is unlikely that the differences between these groups came about by chance.

Alternatively, if there is high within-group variance and low between-group variance, then your statistical test will reflect that with a high p -value. This means it is likely that any difference you measure between groups is due to chance.

Your choice of statistical test will be based on the type of variables and the level of measurement of your collected data .

• an estimate of the difference in average height between the two groups.
• a p -value showing how likely you are to see this difference if the null hypothesis of no difference is true.

Based on the outcome of your statistical test, you will have to decide whether to reject or fail to reject your null hypothesis.

In most cases you will use the p -value generated by your statistical test to guide your decision. And in most cases, your predetermined level of significance for rejecting the null hypothesis will be 0.05 – that is, when there is a less than 5% chance that you would see these results if the null hypothesis were true.

In some cases, researchers choose a more conservative level of significance, such as 0.01 (1%). This minimizes the risk of incorrectly rejecting the null hypothesis ( Type I error ).

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

The results of hypothesis testing will be presented in the results and discussion sections of your research paper , dissertation or thesis .

In the results section you should give a brief summary of the data and a summary of the results of your statistical test (for example, the estimated difference between group means and associated p -value). In the discussion , you can discuss whether your initial hypothesis was supported by your results or not.

In the formal language of hypothesis testing, we talk about rejecting or failing to reject the null hypothesis. You will probably be asked to do this in your statistics assignments.

However, when presenting research results in academic papers we rarely talk this way. Instead, we go back to our alternate hypothesis (in this case, the hypothesis that men are on average taller than women) and state whether the result of our test did or did not support the alternate hypothesis.

If your null hypothesis was rejected, this result is interpreted as “supported the alternate hypothesis.”

These are superficial differences; you can see that they mean the same thing.

You might notice that we don’t say that we reject or fail to reject the alternate hypothesis . This is because hypothesis testing is not designed to prove or disprove anything. It is only designed to test whether a pattern we measure could have arisen spuriously, or by chance.

If we reject the null hypothesis based on our research (i.e., we find that it is unlikely that the pattern arose by chance), then we can say our test lends support to our hypothesis . But if the pattern does not pass our decision rule, meaning that it could have arisen by chance, then we say the test is inconsistent with our hypothesis .

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

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

Methodology

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

Research bias

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

Bevans, R. (2023, June 22). Hypothesis Testing | A Step-by-Step Guide with Easy Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 24, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/hypothesis-testing/

Is this article helpful?

Rebecca Bevans

Other students also liked, choosing the right statistical test | types & examples, understanding p values | definition and examples, what is your plagiarism score.

How to write a research hypothesis

Last updated

19 January 2023

Reviewed by

Miroslav Damyanov

Start with a broad subject matter that excites you, so your curiosity will motivate your work. Conduct a literature search to determine the range of questions already addressed and spot any holes in the existing research.

Narrow the topics that interest you and determine your research question. Rather than focusing on a hole in the research, you might choose to challenge an existing assumption, a process called problematization. You may also find yourself with a short list of questions or related topics.

Use the FINER method to determine the single problem you'll address with your research. FINER stands for:

I nteresting

You need a feasible research question, meaning that there is a way to address the question. You should find it interesting, but so should a larger audience. Rather than repeating research that others have already conducted, your research hypothesis should test something novel or unique. 

The research must fall into accepted ethical parameters as defined by the government of your country and your university or college if you're an academic. You'll also need to come up with a relevant question since your research should provide a contribution to the existing research area.

This process typically narrows your shortlist down to a single problem you'd like to study and the variable you want to test. You're ready to write your hypothesis statements.

Make research less tedious

Dovetail streamlines research to help you uncover and share actionable insights

• Types of research hypotheses

It is important to narrow your topic down to one idea before trying to write your research hypothesis. You'll only test one problem at a time. To do this, you'll write two hypotheses – a null hypothesis (H0) and an alternative hypothesis (Ha).

You'll come across many terms related to developing a research hypothesis or referring to a specific type of hypothesis. Let's take a quick look at these terms.

Null hypothesis

The term null hypothesis refers to a research hypothesis type that assumes no statistically significant relationship exists within a set of observations or data. It represents a claim that assumes that any observed relationship is due to chance. Represented as H0, the null represents the conjecture of the research.

Alternative hypothesis

The alternative hypothesis accompanies the null hypothesis. It states that the situation presented in the null hypothesis is false or untrue, and claims an observed effect in your test. This is typically denoted by Ha or H(n), where “n” stands for the number of alternative hypotheses. You can have more than one alternative hypothesis. 

Simple hypothesis

The term simple hypothesis refers to a hypothesis or theory that predicts the relationship between two variables - the independent (predictor) and the dependent (predicted). 

Complex hypothesis

The term complex hypothesis refers to a model – either quantitative (mathematical) or qualitative . A complex hypothesis states the surmised relationship between two or more potentially related variables.

Directional hypothesis

When creating a statistical hypothesis, the directional hypothesis (the null hypothesis) states an assumption regarding one parameter of a population. Some academics call this the “one-sided” hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis indicates whether the researcher tests for a positive or negative effect by including either the greater than (">") or less than ("<") sign.

Non-directional hypothesis

We refer to the alternative hypothesis in a statistical research question as a non-directional hypothesis. It includes the not equal ("≠") sign to show that the research tests whether or not an effect exists without specifying the effect's direction (positive or negative).

Associative hypothesis

The term associative hypothesis assumes a link between two variables but stops short of stating that one variable impacts the other. Academic statistical literature asserts in this sense that correlation does not imply causation. So, although the hypothesis notes the correlation between two variables – the independent and dependent - it does not predict how the two interact.

Logical hypothesis

Typically used in philosophy rather than science, researchers can't test a logical hypothesis because the technology or data set doesn't yet exist. A logical hypothesis uses logic as the basis of its assumptions. 

In some cases, a logical hypothesis can become an empirical hypothesis once technology provides an opportunity for testing. Until that time, the question remains too expensive or complex to address. Note that a logical hypothesis is not a statistical hypothesis.

Empirical hypothesis

When we consider the opposite of a logical hypothesis, we call this an empirical or working hypothesis. This type of hypothesis considers a scientifically measurable question. A researcher can consider and test an empirical hypothesis through replicable tests, observations, and measurements.

Statistical hypothesis

The term statistical hypothesis refers to a test of a theory that uses representative statistical models to test relationships between variables to draw conclusions regarding a large population. This requires an existing large data set, commonly referred to as big data, or implementing a survey to obtain original statistical information to form a data set for the study. 

Testing this type of hypothesis requires the use of random samples. Note that the null and alternative hypotheses are used in statistical hypothesis testing.

Causal hypothesis

The term causal hypothesis refers to a research hypothesis that tests a cause-and-effect relationship. A causal hypothesis is utilized when conducting experimental or quasi-experimental research.

Descriptive hypothesis

The term descriptive hypothesis refers to a research hypothesis used in non-experimental research, specifying an influence in the relationship between two variables.

• What makes an effective research hypothesis?

An effective research hypothesis offers a clearly defined, specific statement, using simple wording that contains no assumptions or generalizations, and that you can test. A well-written hypothesis should predict the tested relationship and its outcome. It contains zero ambiguity and offers results you can observe and test. 

The research hypothesis should address a question relevant to a research area. Overall, your research hypothesis needs the following essentials:

Hypothesis Essential #1: Specificity & Clarity

Hypothesis Essential #2: Testability (Provability)

• How to develop a good research hypothesis

In developing your hypothesis statements, you must pre-plan some of your statistical analysis. Once you decide on your problem to examine, determine three aspects:

the parameter you'll test

the test's direction (left-tailed, right-tailed, or non-directional)

the hypothesized parameter value

Any quantitative research includes a hypothesized parameter value of a mean, a proportion, or the difference between two proportions. Here's how to note each parameter:

Single mean (μ)

Paired means (μd)

Single proportion (p)

Difference between two independent means (μ1−μ2)

Difference between two proportions (p1−p2)

Simple linear regression slope (β)

Correlation (ρ)

Defining these parameters and determining whether you want to test the mean, proportion, or differences helps you determine the statistical tests you'll conduct to analyze your data. When writing your hypothesis, you only need to decide which parameter to test and in what overarching way.

The null research hypothesis must include everyday language, in a single sentence, stating the problem you want to solve. Write it as an if-then statement with defined variables. Write an alternative research hypothesis that states the opposite.

• What is the correct format for writing a hypothesis?

The following example shows the proper format and textual content of a hypothesis. It follows commonly accepted academic standards.

Null hypothesis (H0): High school students who participate in varsity sports as opposed to those who do not, fail to score higher on leadership tests than students who do not participate.

Alternative hypothesis (H1): High school students who play a varsity sport as opposed to those who do not participate in team athletics will score higher on leadership tests than students who do not participate in athletics.

The research question tests the correlation between varsity sports participation and leadership qualities expressed as a score on leadership tests. It compares the population of athletes to non-athletes.

• What are the five steps of a hypothesis?

Once you decide on the specific problem or question you want to address, you can write your research hypothesis. Use this five-step system to hone your null hypothesis and generate your alternative hypothesis.

Step 1 : Create your research question. This topic should interest and excite you; answering it provides relevant information to an industry or academic area.

Step 2 : Conduct a literature review to gather essential existing research.

Step 3 : Write a clear, strong, simply worded sentence that explains your test parameter, test direction, and hypothesized parameter.

Step 4 : Read it a few times. Have others read it and ask them what they think it means. Refine your statement accordingly until it becomes understandable to everyone. While not everyone can or will comprehend every research study conducted, any person from the general population should be able to read your hypothesis and alternative hypothesis and understand the essential question you want to answer.

Step 5 : Re-write your null hypothesis until it reads simply and understandably. Write your alternative hypothesis.

What is the Red Queen hypothesis?

Some hypotheses are well-known, such as the Red Queen hypothesis. Choose your wording carefully, since you could become like the famed scientist Dr. Leigh Van Valen. In 1973, Dr. Van Valen proposed the Red Queen hypothesis to describe coevolutionary activity, specifically reciprocal evolutionary effects between species to explain extinction rates in the fossil record. 

Essentially, Van Valen theorized that to survive, each species remains in a constant state of adaptation, evolution, and proliferation, and constantly competes for survival alongside other species doing the same. Only by doing this can a species avoid extinction. Van Valen took the hypothesis title from the Lewis Carroll book, "Through the Looking Glass," which contains a key character named the Red Queen who explains to Alice that for all of her running, she's merely running in place.

• Getting started with your research

In conclusion, once you write your null hypothesis (H0) and an alternative hypothesis (Ha), you’ve essentially authored the elevator pitch of your research. These two one-sentence statements describe your topic in simple, understandable terms that both professionals and laymen can understand. They provide the starting point of your research project.

Should you be using a customer insights hub?

Do you want to discover previous research faster?

Do you share your research findings with others?

Do you analyze research data?

Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 18 April 2023

Last updated: 27 February 2023

Last updated: 5 February 2023

Last updated: 16 April 2023

Last updated: 16 August 2024

Last updated: 9 March 2023

Last updated: 30 April 2024

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 4 July 2024

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 13 May 2024

Latest articles

Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next, log in or sign up.

Get started for free

• How it works

How to Write a Hypothesis – Steps & Tips

Published by Alaxendra Bets at August 14th, 2021 , Revised On October 26, 2023

What is a Research Hypothesis?

You can test a research statement with the help of experimental or theoretical research, known as a hypothesis.

If you want to find out the similarities, differences, and relationships between variables, you must write a testable hypothesis before compiling the data, performing analysis, and generating results to complete.

The data analysis and findings will help you test the hypothesis and see whether it is true or false. Here is all you need to know about how to write a hypothesis for a  dissertation .

Research Hypothesis Definition

Not sure what the meaning of the research hypothesis is?

A research hypothesis predicts an answer to the research question  based on existing theoretical knowledge or experimental data.

Some studies may have multiple hypothesis statements depending on the research question(s).  A research hypothesis must be based on formulas, facts, and theories. It should be testable by data analysis, observations, experiments, or other scientific methodologies that can refute or support the statement.

Variables in Hypothesis

Developing a hypothesis is easy. Most research studies have two or more variables in the hypothesis, particularly studies involving correlational and experimental research. The researcher can control or change the independent variable(s) while measuring and observing the independent variable(s).

“How long a student sleeps affects test scores.”

In the above statement, the dependent variable is the test score, while the independent variable is the length of time spent in sleep. Developing a hypothesis will be easy if you know your research’s dependent and independent variables.

Once you have developed a thesis statement, questions such as how to write a hypothesis for the dissertation and how to test a research hypothesis become pretty straightforward.

Looking for dissertation help?

Researchprospect to the rescue then.

We have expert writers on our team who are skilled at helping students with quantitative dissertations across a variety of STEM disciplines. Guaranteeing 100% satisfaction!

Step-by-Step Guide on How to Write a Hypothesis

Here are the steps involved in how to write a hypothesis for a dissertation.

Step 1: Start with a Research Question

• Begin by asking a specific question about a topic of interest.
• This question should be clear, concise, and researchable.

Example: Does exposure to sunlight affect plant growth?

Step 2: Do Preliminary Research

• Before formulating a hypothesis, conduct background research to understand existing knowledge on the topic.
• Familiarise yourself with prior studies, theories, or observations related to the research question.

Step 3: Define Variables

• Independent Variable (IV): The factor that you change or manipulate in an experiment.
• Dependent Variable (DV): The factor that you measure.

Example: IV: Amount of sunlight exposure (e.g., 2 hours/day, 4 hours/day, 8 hours/day) DV: Plant growth (e.g., height in centimetres)

Step 4: Formulate the Hypothesis

• A hypothesis is a statement that predicts the relationship between variables.
• It is often written as an “if-then” statement.

Example: If plants receive more sunlight, then they will grow taller.

Step 5: Ensure it is Testable

A good hypothesis is empirically testable. This means you should be able to design an experiment or observation to test its validity.

Example: You can set up an experiment where plants are exposed to varying amounts of sunlight and then measure their growth over a period of time.

Step 6: Consider Potential Confounding Variables

• Confounding variables are factors other than the independent variable that might affect the outcome.
• It is important to identify these to ensure that they do not skew your results.

Example: Soil quality, water frequency, or type of plant can all affect growth. Consider keeping these constant in your experiment.

Step 7: Write the Null Hypothesis

• The null hypothesis is a statement that there is no effect or no relationship between the variables.
• It is what you aim to disprove or reject through your research.

Example: There is no difference in plant growth regardless of the amount of sunlight exposure.

Step 8: Test your Hypothesis

Design an experiment or conduct observations to test your hypothesis.

Example: Grow three sets of plants: one set exposed to 2 hours of sunlight daily, another exposed to 4 hours, and a third exposed to 8 hours. Measure and compare their growth after a set period.

Step 9: Analyse the Results

After testing, review your data to determine if it supports your hypothesis.

Step 10: Draw Conclusions

• Based on your findings, determine whether you can accept or reject the hypothesis.
• Remember, even if you reject your hypothesis, it’s a valuable result. It can guide future research and refine questions.

Three Ways to Phrase a Hypothesis

Try to use “if”… and “then”… to identify the variables. The independent variable should be present in the first part of the hypothesis, while the dependent variable will form the second part of the statement. Consider understanding the below research hypothesis example to create a specific, clear, and concise research hypothesis;

If an obese lady starts attending Zomba fitness classes, her health will improve.

In academic research, you can write the predicted variable relationship directly because most research studies correlate terms.

The number of Zomba fitness classes attended by the obese lady has a positive effect on health.

If your research compares two groups, then you can develop a hypothesis statement on their differences.

An obese lady who attended most Zumba fitness classes will have better health than those who attended a few.

How to Write a Null Hypothesis

If a statistical analysis is involved in your research, then you must create a null hypothesis. If you find any relationship between the variables, then the null hypothesis will be the default position that there is no relationship between them. H0 is the symbol for the null hypothesis, while the hypothesis is represented as H1. The null hypothesis will also answer your question, “How to test the research hypothesis in the dissertation.”

H0: The number of Zumba fitness classes attended by the obese lady does not affect her health.

H1: The number of Zumba fitness classes attended by obese lady positively affects health.

Also see:  Your Dissertation in Education

Hypothesis Examples

Research Question: Does the amount of sunlight a plant receives affect its growth? Hypothesis: Plants that receive more sunlight will grow taller than plants that receive less sunlight.

Research Question: Do students who eat breakfast perform better in school exams than those who don’t? Hypothesis: Students who eat a morning breakfast will score higher on school exams compared to students who skip breakfast.

Research Question: Does listening to music while studying impact a student’s ability to retain information? Hypothesis 1 (Directional): Students who listen to music while studying will retain less information than those who study in silence. Hypothesis 2 (Non-directional): There will be a difference in information retention between students who listen to music while studying and those who study in silence.

How can ResearchProspect Help?

If you are unsure about how to rest a research hypothesis in a dissertation or simply unsure about how to develop a hypothesis for your research, then you can take advantage of our dissertation services which cover every tiny aspect of a dissertation project you might need help with including but not limited to setting up a hypothesis and research questions,  help with individual chapters ,  full dissertation writing ,  statistical analysis , and much more.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the 5 rules for writing a good hypothesis.

• Clear Statement: State a clear relationship between variables.
• Testable: Ensure it can be investigated and measured.
• Specific: Avoid vague terms, be precise in predictions.
• Falsifiable: Design to allow potential disproof.
• Relevant: Address research question and align with existing knowledge.

What is a hypothesis in simple words?

A hypothesis is an educated guess or prediction about something that can be tested. It is a statement that suggests a possible explanation for an event or phenomenon based on prior knowledge or observation. Scientists use hypotheses as a starting point for experiments to discover if they are true or false.

What is the hypothesis and examples?

A hypothesis is a testable prediction or explanation for an observation or phenomenon. For example, if plants are given sunlight, then they will grow. In this case, the hypothesis suggests that sunlight has a positive effect on plant growth. It can be tested by experimenting with plants in varying light conditions.

What is the hypothesis in research definition?

A hypothesis in research is a clear, testable statement predicting the possible outcome of a study based on prior knowledge and observation. It serves as the foundation for conducting experiments or investigations. Researchers test the validity of the hypothesis to draw conclusions and advance knowledge in a particular field.

Why is it called a hypothesis?

The term “hypothesis” originates from the Greek word “hypothesis,” which means “base” or “foundation.” It’s used to describe a foundational statement or proposition that can be tested. In scientific contexts, it denotes a tentative explanation for a phenomenon, serving as a starting point for investigation or experimentation.

You May Also Like

Let’s briefly examine the concept of research paradigms, their pillars, purposes, types, examples, and how they can be combined.

Make sure that your selected topic is intriguing, manageable, and relevant. Here are some guidelines to help understand how to find a good dissertation topic.

Penning your dissertation proposal can be a rather daunting task. Here are comprehensive guidelines on how to write a dissertation proposal.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Write a Research Hypothesis: Good & Bad Examples

What is a research hypothesis?

A research hypothesis is an attempt at explaining a phenomenon or the relationships between phenomena/variables in the real world. Hypotheses are sometimes called “educated guesses”, but they are in fact (or let’s say they should be) based on previous observations, existing theories, scientific evidence, and logic. A research hypothesis is also not a prediction—rather, predictions are ( should be) based on clearly formulated hypotheses. For example, “We tested the hypothesis that KLF2 knockout mice would show deficiencies in heart development” is an assumption or prediction, not a hypothesis. 

The research hypothesis at the basis of this prediction is “the product of the KLF2 gene is involved in the development of the cardiovascular system in mice”—and this hypothesis is probably (hopefully) based on a clear observation, such as that mice with low levels of Kruppel-like factor 2 (which KLF2 codes for) seem to have heart problems. From this hypothesis, you can derive the idea that a mouse in which this particular gene does not function cannot develop a normal cardiovascular system, and then make the prediction that we started with. 

What is the difference between a hypothesis and a prediction?

You might think that these are very subtle differences, and you will certainly come across many publications that do not contain an actual hypothesis or do not make these distinctions correctly. But considering that the formulation and testing of hypotheses is an integral part of the scientific method, it is good to be aware of the concepts underlying this approach. The two hallmarks of a scientific hypothesis are falsifiability (an evaluation standard that was introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper in 1934) and testability —if you cannot use experiments or data to decide whether an idea is true or false, then it is not a hypothesis (or at least a very bad one).

So, in a nutshell, you (1) look at existing evidence/theories, (2) come up with a hypothesis, (3) make a prediction that allows you to (4) design an experiment or data analysis to test it, and (5) come to a conclusion. Of course, not all studies have hypotheses (there is also exploratory or hypothesis-generating research), and you do not necessarily have to state your hypothesis as such in your paper. 

But for the sake of understanding the principles of the scientific method, let’s first take a closer look at the different types of hypotheses that research articles refer to and then give you a step-by-step guide for how to formulate a strong hypothesis for your own paper.

Types of Research Hypotheses

Hypotheses can be simple , which means they describe the relationship between one single independent variable (the one you observe variations in or plan to manipulate) and one single dependent variable (the one you expect to be affected by the variations/manipulation). If there are more variables on either side, you are dealing with a complex hypothesis. You can also distinguish hypotheses according to the kind of relationship between the variables you are interested in (e.g., causal or associative ). But apart from these variations, we are usually interested in what is called the “alternative hypothesis” and, in contrast to that, the “null hypothesis”. If you think these two should be listed the other way round, then you are right, logically speaking—the alternative should surely come second. However, since this is the hypothesis we (as researchers) are usually interested in, let’s start from there.

Alternative Hypothesis

If you predict a relationship between two variables in your study, then the research hypothesis that you formulate to describe that relationship is your alternative hypothesis (usually H1 in statistical terms). The goal of your hypothesis testing is thus to demonstrate that there is sufficient evidence that supports the alternative hypothesis, rather than evidence for the possibility that there is no such relationship. The alternative hypothesis is usually the research hypothesis of a study and is based on the literature, previous observations, and widely known theories. 

Null Hypothesis

The hypothesis that describes the other possible outcome, that is, that your variables are not related, is the null hypothesis ( H0 ). Based on your findings, you choose between the two hypotheses—usually that means that if your prediction was correct, you reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative. Make sure, however, that you are not getting lost at this step of the thinking process: If your prediction is that there will be no difference or change, then you are trying to find support for the null hypothesis and reject H1. 

Directional Hypothesis

While the null hypothesis is obviously “static”, the alternative hypothesis can specify a direction for the observed relationship between variables—for example, that mice with higher expression levels of a certain protein are more active than those with lower levels. This is then called a one-tailed hypothesis. 

Another example for a directional one-tailed alternative hypothesis would be that 

H1: Attending private classes before important exams has a positive effect on performance. 

Your null hypothesis would then be that

H0: Attending private classes before important exams has no/a negative effect on performance.

Nondirectional Hypothesis

A nondirectional hypothesis does not specify the direction of the potentially observed effect, only that there is a relationship between the studied variables—this is called a two-tailed hypothesis. For instance, if you are studying a new drug that has shown some effects on pathways involved in a certain condition (e.g., anxiety) in vitro in the lab, but you can’t say for sure whether it will have the same effects in an animal model or maybe induce other/side effects that you can’t predict and potentially increase anxiety levels instead, you could state the two hypotheses like this:

H1: The only lab-tested drug (somehow) affects anxiety levels in an anxiety mouse model.

You then test this nondirectional alternative hypothesis against the null hypothesis:

H0: The only lab-tested drug has no effect on anxiety levels in an anxiety mouse model.

How to Write a Hypothesis for a Research Paper

Now that we understand the important distinctions between different kinds of research hypotheses, let’s look at a simple process of how to write a hypothesis.

Writing a Hypothesis Step:1

Ask a question, based on earlier research. Research always starts with a question, but one that takes into account what is already known about a topic or phenomenon. For example, if you are interested in whether people who have pets are happier than those who don’t, do a literature search and find out what has already been demonstrated. You will probably realize that yes, there is quite a bit of research that shows a relationship between happiness and owning a pet—and even studies that show that owning a dog is more beneficial than owning a cat ! Let’s say you are so intrigued by this finding that you wonder: 

What is it that makes dog owners even happier than cat owners? 

Let’s move on to Step 2 and find an answer to that question.

Writing a Hypothesis Step 2:

Formulate a strong hypothesis by answering your own question. Again, you don’t want to make things up, take unicorns into account, or repeat/ignore what has already been done. Looking at the dog-vs-cat papers your literature search returned, you see that most studies are based on self-report questionnaires on personality traits, mental health, and life satisfaction. What you don’t find is any data on actual (mental or physical) health measures, and no experiments. You therefore decide to make a bold claim come up with the carefully thought-through hypothesis that it’s maybe the lifestyle of the dog owners, which includes walking their dog several times per day, engaging in fun and healthy activities such as agility competitions, and taking them on trips, that gives them that extra boost in happiness. You could therefore answer your question in the following way:

Dog owners are happier than cat owners because of the dog-related activities they engage in.

Now you have to verify that your hypothesis fulfills the two requirements we introduced at the beginning of this resource article: falsifiability and testability . If it can’t be wrong and can’t be tested, it’s not a hypothesis. We are lucky, however, because yes, we can test whether owning a dog but not engaging in any of those activities leads to lower levels of happiness or well-being than owning a dog and playing and running around with them or taking them on trips.  

Writing a Hypothesis Step 3:

Make your predictions and define your variables. We have verified that we can test our hypothesis, but now we have to define all the relevant variables, design our experiment or data analysis, and make precise predictions. You could, for example, decide to study dog owners (not surprising at this point), let them fill in questionnaires about their lifestyle as well as their life satisfaction (as other studies did), and then compare two groups of active and inactive dog owners. Alternatively, if you want to go beyond the data that earlier studies produced and analyzed and directly manipulate the activity level of your dog owners to study the effect of that manipulation, you could invite them to your lab, select groups of participants with similar lifestyles, make them change their lifestyle (e.g., couch potato dog owners start agility classes, very active ones have to refrain from any fun activities for a certain period of time) and assess their happiness levels before and after the intervention. In both cases, your independent variable would be “ level of engagement in fun activities with dog” and your dependent variable would be happiness or well-being . 

Examples of a Good and Bad Hypothesis

Let’s look at a few examples of good and bad hypotheses to get you started.

Good Hypothesis Examples

Bad Hypothesis Examples

Tips for Writing a Research Hypothesis

If you understood the distinction between a hypothesis and a prediction we made at the beginning of this article, then you will have no problem formulating your hypotheses and predictions correctly. To refresh your memory: We have to (1) look at existing evidence, (2) come up with a hypothesis, (3) make a prediction, and (4) design an experiment. For example, you could summarize your dog/happiness study like this:

(1) While research suggests that dog owners are happier than cat owners, there are no reports on what factors drive this difference. (2) We hypothesized that it is the fun activities that many dog owners (but very few cat owners) engage in with their pets that increases their happiness levels. (3) We thus predicted that preventing very active dog owners from engaging in such activities for some time and making very inactive dog owners take up such activities would lead to an increase and decrease in their overall self-ratings of happiness, respectively. (4) To test this, we invited dog owners into our lab, assessed their mental and emotional well-being through questionnaires, and then assigned them to an “active” and an “inactive” group, depending on… 

Note that you use “we hypothesize” only for your hypothesis, not for your experimental prediction, and “would” or “if – then” only for your prediction, not your hypothesis. A hypothesis that states that something “would” affect something else sounds as if you don’t have enough confidence to make a clear statement—in which case you can’t expect your readers to believe in your research either. Write in the present tense, don’t use modal verbs that express varying degrees of certainty (such as may, might, or could ), and remember that you are not drawing a conclusion while trying not to exaggerate but making a clear statement that you then, in a way, try to disprove . And if that happens, that is not something to fear but an important part of the scientific process.

Similarly, don’t use “we hypothesize” when you explain the implications of your research or make predictions in the conclusion section of your manuscript, since these are clearly not hypotheses in the true sense of the word. As we said earlier, you will find that many authors of academic articles do not seem to care too much about these rather subtle distinctions, but thinking very clearly about your own research will not only help you write better but also ensure that even that infamous Reviewer 2 will find fewer reasons to nitpick about your manuscript. 

Perfect Your Manuscript With Professional Editing

Now that you know how to write a strong research hypothesis for your research paper, you might be interested in our free AI Proofreader , Wordvice AI, which finds and fixes errors in grammar, punctuation, and word choice in academic texts. Or if you are interested in human proofreading , check out our English editing services , including research paper editing and manuscript editing .

On the Wordvice academic resources website , you can also find many more articles and other resources that can help you with writing the other parts of your research paper , with making a research paper outline before you put everything together, or with writing an effective cover letter once you are ready to submit.

How to Develop a Good Research Hypothesis

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

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

Table of Contents

What is Hypothesis?

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

What is a Research Hypothesis?

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

Characteristics of a Good Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

Source: Educational Hub

How to formulate a research hypothesis.

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

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

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

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

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

3. Define the variables

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

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

4. Scrutinize the hypothesis

Evaluate assumptions, predictions, and evidence rigorously to refine your understanding.

Types of Research Hypothesis

The types of research hypothesis are stated below:

1. Simple Hypothesis

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

2. Complex Hypothesis

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

3. Directional Hypothesis

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

4. Non-directional Hypothesis

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

5. Associative and Causal Hypothesis

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

6. Null Hypothesis

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

7. Alternative Hypothesis

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

Research Hypothesis Examples of Independent and Dependent Variables

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

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

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

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

Importance of a Testable Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

Frequently Asked Questions

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks a lot for your valuable guidance.

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

Useful piece!

This is awesome.Wow.

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

Nicely explained

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

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

clear and concise. thanks.

So Good so Amazing

Good to learn

Thanks a lot for explaining to my level of understanding

Explained well and in simple terms. Quick read! Thank you

It awesome. It has really positioned me in my research project

Brief and easily digested

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

• Industry News

COPE Forum Discussion Highlights Challenges and Urges Clarity in Institutional Authorship Standards

The COPE forum discussion held in December 2023 initiated with a fundamental question — is…

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right…

How to Design Effective Research Questionnaires for Robust Findings

Sign-up to read more

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

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

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

• Publishing Research
• AI in Academia
• Promoting Research
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer Review Week 2024
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

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

In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process?

• Privacy Policy

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

What is a Hypothesis – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Definition:

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

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

Types of Hypothesis

Types of Hypothesis are as follows:

Research Hypothesis

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

Null Hypothesis

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

Alternative Hypothesis

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

Directional Hypothesis

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

Non-directional Hypothesis

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

Statistical Hypothesis

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

Composite Hypothesis

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

Empirical Hypothesis

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

Simple Hypothesis

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

Complex Hypothesis

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

Applications of Hypothesis

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

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

How to write a Hypothesis

Here are the steps to follow when writing a hypothesis:

Identify the Research Question

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

Conduct a Literature Review

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

Determine the Variables

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

Formulate the Hypothesis

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

Write the Null Hypothesis

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

Refine the Hypothesis

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

Examples of Hypothesis

Here are a few examples of hypotheses in different fields:

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

Purpose of Hypothesis

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

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

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

When to use Hypothesis

Here are some common situations in which hypotheses are used:

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

Characteristics of Hypothesis

Here are some common characteristics of a hypothesis:

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

Advantages of Hypothesis

Hypotheses have several advantages in scientific research and experimentation:

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

Limitations of Hypothesis

Some Limitations of the Hypothesis are as follows:

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

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Ethical Considerations – Types, Examples and...

Research Results Section – Writing Guide and...

Tables in Research Paper – Types, Creating Guide...

Informed Consent in Research – Types, Templates...

Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing...

Definition of a Hypothesis

What it is and how it's used in sociology

• Key Concepts
• Major Sociologists
• News & Issues
• Research, Samples, and Statistics
• Recommended Reading
• Archaeology

A hypothesis is a prediction of what will be found at the outcome of a research project and is typically focused on the relationship between two different variables studied in the research. It is usually based on both theoretical expectations about how things work and already existing scientific evidence.

Within social science, a hypothesis can take two forms. It can predict that there is no relationship between two variables, in which case it is a null hypothesis . Or, it can predict the existence of a relationship between variables, which is known as an alternative hypothesis.

In either case, the variable that is thought to either affect or not affect the outcome is known as the independent variable, and the variable that is thought to either be affected or not is the dependent variable.

Researchers seek to determine whether or not their hypothesis, or hypotheses if they have more than one, will prove true. Sometimes they do, and sometimes they do not. Either way, the research is considered successful if one can conclude whether or not a hypothesis is true. 

Null Hypothesis

A researcher has a null hypothesis when she or he believes, based on theory and existing scientific evidence, that there will not be a relationship between two variables. For example, when examining what factors influence a person's highest level of education within the U.S., a researcher might expect that place of birth, number of siblings, and religion would not have an impact on the level of education. This would mean the researcher has stated three null hypotheses.

Alternative Hypothesis

Taking the same example, a researcher might expect that the economic class and educational attainment of one's parents, and the race of the person in question are likely to have an effect on one's educational attainment. Existing evidence and social theories that recognize the connections between wealth and cultural resources , and how race affects access to rights and resources in the U.S. , would suggest that both economic class and educational attainment of the one's parents would have a positive effect on educational attainment. In this case, economic class and educational attainment of one's parents are independent variables, and one's educational attainment is the dependent variable—it is hypothesized to be dependent on the other two.

Conversely, an informed researcher would expect that being a race other than white in the U.S. is likely to have a negative impact on a person's educational attainment. This would be characterized as a negative relationship, wherein being a person of color has a negative effect on one's educational attainment. In reality, this hypothesis proves true, with the exception of Asian Americans , who go to college at a higher rate than whites do. However, Blacks and Hispanics and Latinos are far less likely than whites and Asian Americans to go to college.

Formulating a Hypothesis

Formulating a hypothesis can take place at the very beginning of a research project , or after a bit of research has already been done. Sometimes a researcher knows right from the start which variables she is interested in studying, and she may already have a hunch about their relationships. Other times, a researcher may have an interest in ​a particular topic, trend, or phenomenon, but he may not know enough about it to identify variables or formulate a hypothesis.

Whenever a hypothesis is formulated, the most important thing is to be precise about what one's variables are, what the nature of the relationship between them might be, and how one can go about conducting a study of them.

Updated by Nicki Lisa Cole, Ph.D

• What It Means When a Variable Is Spurious
• Understanding Path Analysis
• Pilot Study in Research
• Simple Random Sampling
• Exploitation
• What Is Multiculturalism? Definition, Theories, and Examples
• Convenience Samples for Research
• What Is Cultural Capital? Do I Have It?
• What Does Consumerism Mean?
• Visualizing Social Stratification in the U.S.
• What Is Symbolic Interactionism?
• What Is Cultural Hegemony?
• Understanding Stratified Samples and How to Make Them
• What Is Groupthink? Definition and Examples
• What Is Ethnography?
• What Is a Reference Group?

HOW TO: Use Articles for Research: Introduction: Hypothesis/Thesis

• What's a Scholarly Journal?
• Reading the Citation
• Authors' Credentials
• Introduction: Hypothesis/Thesis
• Literature Review
• Research Method
• Results/Data
• Discussion/Conclusions

Hypothesis or Thesis

The first few paragraphs of a journal article serve to introduce the topic, to provide the author's hypothesis or thesis, and to indicate why the research was done.  A thesis or hypothesis is not always clearly labled; you may need to read through the introductory paragraphs to determine what the authors are proposing.

• << Previous: Abstract
• Next: Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Jan 29, 2024 3:35 PM
• URL: https://libguides.cayuga-cc.edu/1ST-PRIORITY/articles

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Happiness Hub Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• Happiness Hub
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• Science Writing

How to Write a Hypothesis

Last Updated: May 2, 2023 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Bess Ruff, MA . Bess Ruff is a Geography PhD student at Florida State University. She received her MA in Environmental Science and Management from the University of California, Santa Barbara in 2016. She has conducted survey work for marine spatial planning projects in the Caribbean and provided research support as a graduate fellow for the Sustainable Fisheries Group. There are 9 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 1,034,906 times.

A hypothesis is a description of a pattern in nature or an explanation about some real-world phenomenon that can be tested through observation and experimentation. The most common way a hypothesis is used in scientific research is as a tentative, testable, and falsifiable statement that explains some observed phenomenon in nature. [1] X Research source Many academic fields, from the physical sciences to the life sciences to the social sciences, use hypothesis testing as a means of testing ideas to learn about the world and advance scientific knowledge. Whether you are a beginning scholar or a beginning student taking a class in a science subject, understanding what hypotheses are and being able to generate hypotheses and predictions yourself is very important. These instructions will help get you started.

Preparing to Write a Hypothesis

• If you are writing a hypothesis for a school assignment, this step may be taken care of for you.

• Focus on academic and scholarly writing. You need to be certain that your information is unbiased, accurate, and comprehensive. Scholarly search databases such as Google Scholar and Web of Science can help you find relevant articles from reputable sources.
• You can find information in textbooks, at a library, and online. If you are in school, you can also ask for help from teachers, librarians, and your peers.

• For example, if you are interested in the effects of caffeine on the human body, but notice that nobody seems to have explored whether caffeine affects males differently than it does females, this could be something to formulate a hypothesis about. Or, if you are interested in organic farming, you might notice that no one has tested whether organic fertilizer results in different growth rates for plants than non-organic fertilizer.
• You can sometimes find holes in the existing literature by looking for statements like “it is unknown” in scientific papers or places where information is clearly missing. You might also find a claim in the literature that seems far-fetched, unlikely, or too good to be true, like that caffeine improves math skills. If the claim is testable, you could provide a great service to scientific knowledge by doing your own investigation. If you confirm the claim, the claim becomes even more credible. If you do not find support for the claim, you are helping with the necessary self-correcting aspect of science.
• Examining these types of questions provides an excellent way for you to set yourself apart by filling in important gaps in a field of study.

• Following the examples above, you might ask: "How does caffeine affect females as compared to males?" or "How does organic fertilizer affect plant growth compared to non-organic fertilizer?" The rest of your research will be aimed at answering these questions.

• Following the examples above, if you discover in the literature that there is a pattern that some other types of stimulants seem to affect females more than males, this could be a clue that the same pattern might be true for caffeine. Similarly, if you observe the pattern that organic fertilizer seems to be associated with smaller plants overall, you might explain this pattern with the hypothesis that plants exposed to organic fertilizer grow more slowly than plants exposed to non-organic fertilizer.

Formulating Your Hypothesis

• You can think of the independent variable as the one that is causing some kind of difference or effect to occur. In the examples, the independent variable would be biological sex, i.e. whether a person is male or female, and fertilizer type, i.e. whether the fertilizer is organic or non-organically-based.
• The dependent variable is what is affected by (i.e. "depends" on) the independent variable. In the examples above, the dependent variable would be the measured impact of caffeine or fertilizer.
• Your hypothesis should only suggest one relationship. Most importantly, it should only have one independent variable. If you have more than one, you won't be able to determine which one is actually the source of any effects you might observe.

• Don't worry too much at this point about being precise or detailed.
• In the examples above, one hypothesis would make a statement about whether a person's biological sex might impact the way the person is affected by caffeine; for example, at this point, your hypothesis might simply be: "a person's biological sex is related to how caffeine affects his or her heart rate." The other hypothesis would make a general statement about plant growth and fertilizer; for example your simple explanatory hypothesis might be "plants given different types of fertilizer are different sizes because they grow at different rates."

• Using our example, our non-directional hypotheses would be "there is a relationship between a person's biological sex and how much caffeine increases the person's heart rate," and "there is a relationship between fertilizer type and the speed at which plants grow."
• Directional predictions using the same example hypotheses above would be : "Females will experience a greater increase in heart rate after consuming caffeine than will males," and "plants fertilized with non-organic fertilizer will grow faster than those fertilized with organic fertilizer." Indeed, these predictions and the hypotheses that allow for them are very different kinds of statements. More on this distinction below.
• If the literature provides any basis for making a directional prediction, it is better to do so, because it provides more information. Especially in the physical sciences, non-directional predictions are often seen as inadequate.

• Where necessary, specify the population (i.e. the people or things) about which you hope to uncover new knowledge. For example, if you were only interested the effects of caffeine on elderly people, your prediction might read: "Females over the age of 65 will experience a greater increase in heart rate than will males of the same age." If you were interested only in how fertilizer affects tomato plants, your prediction might read: "Tomato plants treated with non-organic fertilizer will grow faster in the first three months than will tomato plants treated with organic fertilizer."

• For example, you would not want to make the hypothesis: "red is the prettiest color." This statement is an opinion and it cannot be tested with an experiment. However, proposing the generalizing hypothesis that red is the most popular color is testable with a simple random survey. If you do indeed confirm that red is the most popular color, your next step may be to ask: Why is red the most popular color? The answer you propose is your explanatory hypothesis .

• An easy way to get to the hypothesis for this method and prediction is to ask yourself why you think heart rates will increase if children are given caffeine. Your explanatory hypothesis in this case may be that caffeine is a stimulant. At this point, some scientists write a research hypothesis , a statement that includes the hypothesis, the experiment, and the prediction all in one statement.
• For example, If caffeine is a stimulant, and some children are given a drink with caffeine while others are given a drink without caffeine, then the heart rates of those children given a caffeinated drink will increase more than the heart rate of children given a non-caffeinated drink.

• Using the above example, if you were to test the effects of caffeine on the heart rates of children, evidence that your hypothesis is not true, sometimes called the null hypothesis , could occur if the heart rates of both the children given the caffeinated drink and the children given the non-caffeinated drink (called the placebo control) did not change, or lowered or raised with the same magnitude, if there was no difference between the two groups of children.
• It is important to note here that the null hypothesis actually becomes much more useful when researchers test the significance of their results with statistics. When statistics are used on the results of an experiment, a researcher is testing the idea of the null statistical hypothesis. For example, that there is no relationship between two variables or that there is no difference between two groups. [8] X Research source

Hypothesis Examples

Community Q&A

• Remember that science is not necessarily a linear process and can be approached in various ways. [10] X Research source Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0
• When examining the literature, look for research that is similar to what you want to do, and try to build on the findings of other researchers. But also look for claims that you think are suspicious, and test them yourself. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0
• Be specific in your hypotheses, but not so specific that your hypothesis can't be applied to anything outside your specific experiment. You definitely want to be clear about the population about which you are interested in drawing conclusions, but nobody (except your roommates) will be interested in reading a paper with the prediction: "my three roommates will each be able to do a different amount of pushups." Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://undsci.berkeley.edu/for-educators/prepare-and-plan/correcting-misconceptions/#a4
• ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/common_writing_assignments/research_papers/choosing_a_topic.html
• ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/subject_specific_writing/writing_in_the_social_sciences/writing_in_psychology_experimental_report_writing/experimental_reports_1.html
• ↑ https://www.grammarly.com/blog/how-to-write-a-hypothesis/
• ↑ https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/for-students-and-parents/how-create-hypothesis.html
• ↑ https://flexbooks.ck12.org/cbook/ck-12-middle-school-physical-science-flexbook-2.0/section/1.19/primary/lesson/hypothesis-ms-ps/
• ↑ https://iastate.pressbooks.pub/preparingtopublish/chapter/goal-1-contextualize-the-studys-methods/
• ↑ http://mathworld.wolfram.com/NullHypothesis.html
• ↑ http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/scienceflowchart

About This Article

Before writing a hypothesis, think of what questions are still unanswered about a specific subject and make an educated guess about what the answer could be. Then, determine the variables in your question and write a simple statement about how they might be related. Try to focus on specific predictions and variables, such as age or segment of the population, to make your hypothesis easier to test. For tips on how to test your hypothesis, read on! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Onyia Maxwell

Sep 13, 2016

Did this article help you?

Nov 26, 2017

ABEL SHEWADEG

Jun 12, 2018

Connor Gilligan

Jan 2, 2017

Dec 30, 2017

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Don’t miss out! Sign up for

wikiHow’s newsletter

Where to Find The Hypothesis in a Research Article

The question of “Where to Find The Hypothesis in a Research Article” can only be answered by exploring how research articles represent scientific methods.

Table of Contents

Introduction

A research article represents a compilation of information by a scientist concerning an original research idea. It is characterized by a wide range of information including, the purpose of the study, the thesis statement, hypothesis, literature review, methodology, results and conclusion.

The examination of a research article is an important process, and the ability to identify crucial elements of research is paramount for the effective analysis of a research article.

Research articles are usually arranged in specific ways. A hypothesis in a research article is usually located in a specific position in an article. The ability to quickly pinpoint where the hypothesis is located is crucial in becoming an expert in exploring research articles as well as formulating them.

What is a hypothesis

A hypothesis represents a scientific guess that is stated in research. It is a speculative statement concerning the relationship between two or more variables in research.

Therefore, a good hypothesis is a prediction that is testable, specific, and explores what a researcher expects to find in the study.

Formulating a Hypothesis

The creation of a hypothesis represents a critical part of the scientific method. Formulating a hypothesis is important, especially when testing a theory. Most scientific research involves testing theories. Theories, in this case, refer to ideas about the way things relate to one another. For one to formulate a hypothesis to be used in research, they have to be to predict the outcome of the research.

If one cannot predict the outcome, then the research does not need the formulating of a hypothesis because it is either exploratory or descriptive. These forms of research cannot have a hypothesis, and the reason is that there is a limited base of knowledge concerning the subject matter for the prediction of the outcome to be possible.

A good Hypothesis

A good hypothesis has to have two or more variables. These variables have to be measurable or have the potential to be measured. The hypothesis also has to specify how the variables are related to one another.

Where to Find the Hypothesis in a Research Article

The scientific method is characterized by several steps. They include:

• Coming up with a question or the problem that needs to be solved.
• Conducting background research on the problem
• Formulating a hypothesis
• Establishing how the research will be conducted using a research design
• Collecting data
• Analyzing the data and coming up with results
• Provide conclusions
• Presenting the information through a research article.

Based on the above structure, it is evident that the hypothesis is located in the introduction section of a research article. One should look out for “if-then” statements. However, for such statements to be hypotheses, they need to:

• Demonstrates the relationship between variables,
• The relationship needs to be testable and
• The prediction needs to be measurable

A hypothesis is not always clearly labeled. This means that the statement can appear in different forms apart from when formulated using the “if-then” statements. One should, therefore, look out for a statement that offers a prediction of what readers need to expect from the research.

The ability to identify where to find a hypothesis is located in a research article is very important in several ways:

• One can quickly know what the researcher wants to prove using the research.
• It makes individuals effective in reading research articles.
• It enhances an individual’s ability to formulate their own hypothesis when conducting research

Entrust your assignments to our expert writers for excellent results!

Eagle Academics  prides itself in providing quality custom papers for many students around the world. We guarantee exceptional standards, and this is based on the selection of highly professional and experienced tutors and writers in different fields. Our experts can handle any work regardless of the deadline.

You must choose what you do with your time. Let our experts help you with your schoolwork while you focus on other essential things in your life. Talk to us, and we will give you the help that you need.

Calculate the price of your paper

Free features.

• Formatting (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago/Turabian)
• Bibliography
• Upload custom grading criteria

Additional services

• Part-by-part payment
• Links to used sources
• Review your writer’s samples
• Charts and PowerPoint slides

Don’t look far for academic help. We have you covered

Money back guarantee.

Our goal is to give the best services to our clients. However, if for one reason or the other a client is not satisfied, we will refund your money. So the funds paid to us are safe.

Confidentiality

We value our clients’ privacy. No single information of our clients can be shared by third parties.

Our service is legit

Our services follow the laid down academic guidelines. We cannot blackmail our clients, but only strive to offer them the best academic assistance they need.

Get a plagiarism-free paper

Our writers work hand in hand with the quality assurance department to ensure whatever paper you get is totally plagiarism-free.

We can help with urgent tasks

We have standby writers who can handle papers even within 6 hours. Just get in touch and let us know.

Pay a fair price

We have competitive prices that are pocket friendly. In addition, we have plenty of discounts to offer.

Need a better grade? We've got you covered.

• Data Science
• Data Analysis
• Data Visualization
• Machine Learning
• Deep Learning
• Computer Vision
• Artificial Intelligence
• AI ML DS Interview Series
• AI ML DS Projects series
• Data Engineering
• Web Scrapping

Why hypothesis testing is important in research ?

Hypothesis Testing allows researchers to evaluate the validity of their assumptions and draw conclusions based on evidence. It provides a framework for making predictions and determining whether observed results are statistically significant or just occurred by chance. By applying various statistical tests, researchers can measure the strength of the evidence and quantify the uncertainty associated with their findings.

Table of Content

Importance of Hypothesis Testing in Research

Types of hypothesis tests, common errors in hypothesis testing, interpreting the results of hypothesis tests, examples of hypothesis testing in different fields, tools and software for conducting hypothesis tests.

Understanding the importance of hypothesis testing is essential for conducting rigorous and reliable research. It enables researchers to make well-informed decisions, support or challenge existing theories, and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in their respective fields. So, whether you are a scientist, a market analyst, or a student working on a research project, grasp the power of hypothesis testing and elevate the impact of your data analysis.

Hypothesis testing is the cornerstone of the scientific method and plays a vital role in the research process. It allows researchers to make informed decisions and draw reliable conclusions from their data. By formulating a hypothesis and then testing it against the observed data, researchers can determine whether their initial assumptions are supported or refuted. This systematic approach is crucial for advancing knowledge and understanding in various fields, from medicine and psychology to economics and engineering. Hypothesis testing enables researchers to move beyond mere observations and anecdotal evidence, and instead rely on statistical analysis to quantify the strength of their findings. It helps them differentiate between genuine effects and random fluctuations, ensuring that the conclusions drawn are based on rigorous and objective analysis.

Moreover, hypothesis testing is not limited to academic research; it is equally important in the business world, where data-driven decision-making is essential for success. Marketers, for instance, can use hypothesis testing to evaluate the effectiveness of their advertising campaigns, while financial analysts can use it to assess the performance of investment strategies. By incorporating hypothesis testing into their decision-making processes, organizations can make more informed choices and optimize their operations.

Understanding the Null and Alternative Hypotheses

At the heart of hypothesis testing lies the distinction between the null hypothesis (H0) and the alternative hypothesis (H1). The null hypothesis represents the status quo or the assumption that there is no significant difference or relationship between the variables being studied. Conversely, the alternative hypothesis suggests that there is a meaningful difference or relationship that is worth investigating.

Researchers begin by formulating their null and alternative hypotheses based on their research question and existing knowledge. For example, in a study examining the effect of a new drug on blood pressure, the null hypothesis might be that the drug has no effect on blood pressure, while the alternative hypothesis would be that the drug does have an effect on blood pressure.

Steps Involved in Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a structured process that involves several key steps:

• Clearly define the research question and formulate the null and alternative hypotheses.
• Select an appropriate statistical test based on the nature of the data and research question.
• Collect and organize data, ensuring it meets the assumptions required for the chosen test.
• Calculate the test statistic and compare it to the critical value or p-value to determine significance.
• Interpret the results and draw conclusions about the research question.
• One-Sample Tests : These tests compare the mean or proportion of a single sample to a known or hypothesized value. Examples include the one-sample t-test and the one-sample z-test.
• Two-Sample Tests: These tests compare the means or proportions of two independent samples. Examples include the two-sample t-test, the Mann-Whitney U test, and the chi-square test of independence.
• Paired Tests: These tests compare the means or proportions of two related or paired samples, such as before-and-after measurements or matched pairs. Examples include the paired t-test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
• ANOVA Tests : These tests compare the means of three or more independent samples. Examples include one-way ANOVA, two-way ANOVA, and repeated-measures ANOVA.
• Correlation and Regression Tests: These tests examine the relationship between two or more variables. Examples include Pearson’s correlation, Spearman’s rank correlation, and linear regression analysis.

While hypothesis testing is a powerful tool for data analysis, it is not immune to errors. Two common types of errors in hypothesis testing are Type I errors and Type II errors.

Type I Error

A Type I error occurs when the null hypothesis is true, but it is incorrectly rejected. The probability of making a Type I error is typically denoted by the significance level (α), which is the threshold used to determine statistical significance.

Type II Error

Conversely, a Type II error occurs when the null hypothesis is false, but it is not rejected. In this case, the researcher fails to detect a significant effect that is actually present. The probability of making a Type II error is denoted by β.

When a hypothesis test is conducted, the researcher is provided with a p-value, which represents the probability of obtaining the observed results if the null hypothesis is true. If the p-value is less than the chosen significance level (typically 0.05), the null hypothesis is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis is supported.

• Medicine and Pharmacology: Researchers use hypothesis testing to evaluate the effectiveness of new drugs, treatments, or interventions. For example, a clinical trial might test the null hypothesis that a new drug has no effect on a health outcome.
• Psychology and Behavioral Sciences: Psychologists use hypothesis testing to investigate human behavior, cognition, and social phenomena. For instance, a researcher might hypothesize that a new therapy has no effect on depression symptoms.
• Economics and Finance: Economists use hypothesis testing to evaluate market performance, economic policies, and investment strategies. For example, testing the hypothesis that interest rates have no effect on the stock market.
• Engineering and Technology: Engineers use hypothesis testing to optimize product designs, test system reliability, and evaluate new technologies. For example, testing a new manufacturing process to reduce defects.
• Environmental Science: Environmental scientists use hypothesis testing to evaluate the impact of human activities, conservation efforts, and climate change effects.

Various tools are available for conducting hypothesis tests:

• IBM SPSS Statistics : A user-friendly statistical software widely used for hypothesis testing.
• R : An open-source programming language for statistical computing, offering packages like stats , ggplot2 , and dplyr for hypothesis testing.
• Online Tools : Websites such as StatisticsHowTo.com offer hypothesis test calculators for quick analyses.

Hypothesis testing is a crucial tool for researchers across many disciplines. It allows them to make informed decisions, support or challenge theories, and contribute to knowledge advancement. By understanding and mastering hypothesis testing techniques, researchers can significantly enhance their data analysis impact.

Please Login to comment...

Similar reads.

• AI-ML-DS Blogs
• Machine Learning Blogs
• How to Get a Free SSL Certificate
• Best SSL Certificates Provider in India
• Elon Musk's xAI releases Grok-2 AI assistant
• What is OpenAI SearchGPT? How it works and How to Get it?
• Full Stack Developer Roadmap [2024 Updated]

Improve your Coding Skills with Practice

What kind of Experience do you want to share?

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Outlier exclusion procedures must be blind to the researcher's hypothesis

Affiliation.

• 1 Leeds School of Business.
• PMID: 34060886
• DOI: 10.1037/xge0001069

When researchers choose to identify and exclude outliers from their data, should they do so across all the data, or within experimental conditions? A survey of recent papers published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General shows that both methods are widely used, and common data visualization techniques suggest that outliers should be excluded at the condition-level. However, I highlight in the present paper that removing outliers by condition runs against the logic of hypothesis testing, and that this practice leads to unacceptable increases in false-positive rates. I demonstrate that this conclusion holds true across a variety of statistical tests, exclusion criterion and cutoffs, sample sizes, and data types, and shows in simulated experiments and in a reanalysis of existing data that by-condition exclusions can result in false-positive rates as high as 43%. I finally demonstrate that by-condition exclusions are a specific case of a more general issue: Any outlier exclusion procedure that is not blind to the hypothesis that researchers want to test may result in inflated Type I errors. I conclude by offering best practices and recommendations for excluding outliers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Outliers may not be automatically removed. Karch JD. Karch JD. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2023 Jun;152(6):1735-1753. doi: 10.1037/xge0001357. Epub 2023 Apr 27. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2023. PMID: 37104797
• Outlier removal and the relation with reporting errors and quality of psychological research. Bakker M, Wicherts JM. Bakker M, et al. PLoS One. 2014 Jul 29;9(7):e103360. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103360. eCollection 2014. PLoS One. 2014. PMID: 25072606 Free PMC article.
• Outlier exclusion procedures for reaction time analysis: The cures are generally worse than the disease. Miller J. Miller J. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2023 Nov;152(11):3189-3217. doi: 10.1037/xge0001450. Epub 2023 Jul 27. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2023. PMID: 37498697
• Univariate Outliers: A Conceptual Overview for the Nurse Researcher. Mowbray FI, Fox-Wasylyshyn SM, El-Masri MM. Mowbray FI, et al. Can J Nurs Res. 2019 Mar;51(1):31-37. doi: 10.1177/0844562118786647. Epub 2018 Jul 3. Can J Nurs Res. 2019. PMID: 29969044 Review.
• A comprehensive review of group level model performance in the presence of heteroscedasticity: Can a single model control Type I errors in the presence of outliers? Mumford JA. Mumford JA. Neuroimage. 2017 Feb 15;147:658-668. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.12.058. Epub 2016 Dec 25. Neuroimage. 2017. PMID: 28030782 Free PMC article. Review.
• Shifting norms, static behaviour: effects of dynamic norms on meat consumption. Aldoh A, Sparks P, Harris PR. Aldoh A, et al. R Soc Open Sci. 2024 Jun 26;11(6):240407. doi: 10.1098/rsos.240407. eCollection 2024 Jun. R Soc Open Sci. 2024. PMID: 39100183 Free PMC article.
• Instructing somebody else to act: motor co-representations in the instructor. Van der Biest M, Pedinoff R, Verbruggen F, Brass M, Kuhlen AK. Van der Biest M, et al. R Soc Open Sci. 2024 Jan 10;11(1):230839. doi: 10.1098/rsos.230839. eCollection 2024 Jan. R Soc Open Sci. 2024. PMID: 38204793 Free PMC article.
• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• American Psychological Association
• Ovid Technologies, Inc.
• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

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
• Perspective
• Published: 20 August 2024

On the pathogenesis of obesity: causal models and missing pieces of the puzzle

• Faidon Magkos   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1312-7364 1 ,
• Thorkild I. A. Sørensen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4821-430X 2 , 3 , 4 ,
• David Raubenheimer 5 ,
• Nikhil V. Dhurandhar   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1356-1064 6 ,
• Ruth J. F. Loos   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8532-5087 2 ,
• Anja Bosy-Westphal   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8318-9448 7 ,
• Christoffer Clemmensen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2456-9667 2 ,
• Mads F. Hjorth 8 ,
• David B. Allison   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3566-9399 9 ,
• Gary Taubes 10 ,
• Eric Ravussin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2129-547X 11 ,
• Mark I. Friedman   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2684-2620 12 ,
• Kevin D. Hall 13 ,
• David S. Ludwig   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3307-8544 14   nAff17 ,
• John R. Speakman   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2457-1823 15 , 16 &
• Arne Astrup   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8968-8996 8  

Nature Metabolism ( 2024 ) Cite this article

6497 Accesses

172 Altmetric

Metrics details

Application of the physical laws of energy and mass conservation at the whole-body level is not necessarily informative about causal mechanisms of weight gain and the development of obesity. The energy balance model (EBM) and the carbohydrate–insulin model (CIM) are two plausible theories, among several others, attempting to explain why obesity develops within an overall common physiological framework of regulation of human energy metabolism. These models have been used to explain the pathogenesis of obesity in individuals as well as the dramatic increases in the prevalence of obesity worldwide over the past half century. Here, we summarize outcomes of a recent workshop in Copenhagen that brought together obesity experts from around the world to discuss causal models of obesity pathogenesis. These discussions helped to operationally define commonly used terms; delineate the structure of each model, particularly focussing on areas of overlap and divergence; challenge ideas about the importance of purported causal factors for weight gain; and brainstorm on the key scientific questions that need to be answered. We hope that more experimental research in nutrition and other related fields, and more testing of the models and their predictions will pave the way and provide more answers about the pathogenesis of obesity than those currently available.

You have full access to this article via your institution.

Similar content being viewed by others

Competing paradigms of obesity pathogenesis: energy balance versus carbohydrate-insulin models

The energy balance hypothesis of obesity: do the laws of thermodynamics explain excessive adiposity?

Obesity: a 100 year perspective

At a fundamental level, life itself is made possible by a complex network of biochemical reactions that occur inside cells. Many of these reactions require chemical energy, in the form of adenosine triphosphate, which is generated by other reactions that provide energy. Cells can use a variety of metabolic substrates, located locally or remotely, for energy provision or storage. Matching energy supply with energy needs and the ability to store excess energy so that it can be mobilized upon demand are, therefore, central to cellular function.

These processes conform to the physical laws of conservation of energy and mass and have been extrapolated from the cellular to the whole-body level. Accordingly, changes in food intake and, to a lesser extent, energy expenditure are believed to be responsible for variations in body fat stores. This direction of causality dominates texts of human bioenergetics and metabolism and those on the role of diet (and exercise) in the pathogenesis and treatment of obesity 1 . Nevertheless, although the relationship between chronic positive energy balance and weight gain remains unassailable, it does not prove cause and effect 2 , 3 , 4 . It is possible that intrinsic or extrinsic factors (for example, endocrine and neuronal factors, characteristics of the food itself or other environmental influences) stimulate body fat storage and then increase food intake or decrease energy expenditure as a downstream effect, rather than the latter being the causal driver 5 , 6 .

What causes obesity?

Our understanding of the pathophysiology of obesity has evolved substantially in past decades. Two apparently competing models on the pathogenesis of obesity have evolved in an attempt to explain how dietary changes and possibly other environmental influences on human physiology resulted in the observed increase in the prevalence of obesity: the EBM and the CIM 7 . This debate has implications for obesity science and public health and has often resulted in controversial discussions and remarks in scientific publications, popular books and social media 3 , 8 . With this in mind and while acknowledging that other models of obesity exist (for example, focusing on appetite for protein 9 , the psychosocial domain 10 , climate change and environmental pollutants 11 or viruses 12 , to name a few), the Novo Nordisk Foundation invited scientists with contrasting opinions on the pathogenesis of obesity to a 2-d workshop (11–12 September 2023) in Copenhagen, Denmark.

The workshop did not aspire to reach consensus on what causes obesity, but rather the intent was to (1) operationally define commonly used terms (Table 1 ), (2) delineate the structure of each model and overlay suggested routes and causal pathways on top of a common physiological background of energy metabolism and body weight regulation, (3) discuss the importance of purported causal factors for weight gain, (4) brainstorm on the key scientific questions that need to be answered and (5) outline the general principles of appropriate experiments to test between the relevant hypotheses. Ultimately, the goal of the workshop was to help resolve controversies and drive the field forward and thereby serve the scientific community and the public.

Physiological regulation of energy metabolism

Before considering potential causes of obesity, it is important to understand that any model put forth to explain the obesity phenotype and its increasing prevalence in the population must take into account normal physiology. Specifically, the physiological system that normally enables an individual to obtain sufficient energy and nutrients to meet the needs of the body for normal growth, development and physical function while maintaining sufficient triglyceride (fat) stores in adipose tissue to survive periods of insufficient exogenous energy availability (Fig. 1 ).

Humans eat food primarily to meet the body’s energy and nutrient needs for life-sustaining functions (basal metabolic rate, BMR) and all body movements (physical activity energy expenditure, PAEE) and, in some cases, thermoregulation. Food passes through the gut, and nutrients are absorbed into the systemic circulation, affecting secretion of gastrointestinal and pancreatic hormones (for example, insulin). Energy expenditure increases because of the thermic effect of food (TEF), and energy-yielding substrates are partitioned among tissues and intracellularly between oxidation and storage pathways, depending on their availability and demand, under the influence of many hormonal and neural signals. Energy can be stored in and mobilized from various organs and tissues. The brain can sense signals relaying information about energy and nutrient needs, body energy stores and circulating fuels and adjust food intake and peripheral metabolism accordingly by various efferent neural signals (for example, via the autonomic nervous system (ANS)) and by modulating the secretion of neurohormones. Physical activity and many other factors (genetic, behavioural, psychosocial and environmental) can modulate these pathways.

Processes and mechanisms of intermediary metabolism determine the disposition of metabolic fuels within cells and among tissues to maintain energy homeostasis. The brain continuously receives and integrates multiple signals, directly via the blood or from peripheral autonomic afferent neural input, which convey information about the metabolic status of individual organs and tissues and the availability of circulating fuels and hormones in the bloodstream and the gastrointestinal tract. These signals include hormones secreted from the gastrointestinal tract (for example, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1), glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP), peptide YY, cholecystokinin, ghrelin), the pancreas (for example, insulin, glucagon), adipose tissue (for example, leptin, adiponectin), muscle (for example, interleukin 6) and liver (for example, fibroblast growth factor 21) 13 , 14 ; energy-yielding substrates in the intestine and the circulation (for example, glucose) 15 , 16 ; and numerous afferent neural inputs (for example, via the vagus nerve and the enteric nervous system). The brain integrates these internal signals with external signals from the food and non-food environment, including psychosocial cues and competing demands or incentives, thereby inhibiting or promoting food-intake behaviour. The brain can also affect energy expenditure and peripheral metabolism by modifying the activity of the autonomic nervous system, altering the secretion of neurohormones and influencing levels of physical activity.

Ingestion of food, which is preceded by food-anticipatory hormonal changes collectively referred to as the cephalic response 17 , triggers a coordinated neurohormonal response as food components pass through the gut, are digested and are absorbed by the gut and released into the hepatic portal vein or, in the case of fat, into the lymphatic system and eventually appear in the systemic circulation. Some energy from food (for example, from dietary fibre) cannot be absorbed in the upper gastrointestinal tract and is eventually lost in faeces, although part of it is made available in the lower gastrointestinal tract (mostly the colon) in the form of short-chain fatty acids produced by the action of gut microbes on undigested food material 18 . Accordingly, diets with the same gross energy content but varying composition can provide different amounts of metabolisable energy (84–97% of gross energy), partly because of their differing content in indigestible food components and partly because they modulate the composition and metabolic activity of the gut microbiome 19 .

Following the consumption of a typical, mixed macronutrient-containing meal, the ensuing fed state is characterized by an increase in energy expenditure (that is, thermic effect of food) and a shift in the mixture of substrates being oxidized from fat to carbohydrate (that is, metabolic flexibility) 20 , 21 to an extent determined, in part, by the composition of the ingested food. For any given mixture of fuels consumed, there is a prioritisation of substrate oxidation, which is inversely related to the substrate’s storage capacity in the body: alcohol (which cannot be stored) is at the top of this metabolic hierarchy, followed by carbohydrate and protein (which can be stored to a limited extent) and then by fat (which has the largest storage capacity) 22 .

These changes in energy metabolism and substrate oxidation are accompanied by robust alterations in the flux of substrates into and out of organs and tissues. Glucose production and release from the liver decrease, hepatic de novo lipogenesis is stimulated, and uptake of glucose by muscle increases (which is channelled toward glycogen synthesis for storage, conversion to lactate for release or complete oxidation). There is also an increase in glucose uptake by the liver (used toward glycogen synthesis for storage or interconversion to amino acids) and by adipose tissue, where it is converted into lactate for release or fatty acid synthesis for storage as triglycerides. At the same time, fatty acid release from adipose tissue decreases, whereas fatty acid uptake by adipose tissue (toward storage as triglycerides) and also by lean tissues such as the liver and muscle (toward complete oxidation or storage as ‘ectopic’ triglycerides) increases 20 , 21 . These dynamic changes in substrate flux rates into and out of organs and tissues and in intracellular channelling toward oxidative and storage pathways (that is, fuel partitioning), the net result of which determines (but is also affected by) the availability of energy-yielding substrates in the circulation, are under genetic, hormonal and neural control and may also be affected by energy intake, diet composition, physical activity and environmental factors.

One important signal triggered by meal ingestion is the postprandial increase in levels of insulin circulating in plasma and the concomitant increase in the insulin-to-glucagon ratio. Food-derived nutrients differentially affect pancreatic insulin and glucagon secretion. Carbohydrates increase insulin and decrease glucagon levels; fat increases glucagon levels and does not affect or mildly increases insulin levels; protein increases both insulin and glucagon levels 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 . Accordingly, the integrated pancreatic hormonal response after mixed meal ingestion depends on the size of the meal (that is, its calorie content) and macronutrient composition (that is, the relative amounts of carbohydrate, fat and protein) but also on the specific type of these macronutrients (for example, the glycaemic index of carbohydrates, fructose content, the degree of fat saturation, the source of protein and its amino acid composition). In the several hours following meal ingestion, the metabolic, hormonal and neural responses eventually subside, and the body progressively shifts back to fat oxidation as the predominant source of energy in the postabsorptive or fasted state. Modern humans in Westernized societies spend most of the day in the postprandial state (more than 15 h), consume multiple distinct meals (three to six eating occasions, with a median between-meal interval of about 3 h) and tend to abstain from eating only while sleeping 27 , 28 .

According to the EBM (Fig. 2 ), the changing food environment caused increased obesity prevalence primarily by increasing food intake above requirements (positive energy balance), resulting in excess accumulation of body fat. The energy imbalance associated with obesity could be also driven by reductions in the level of physical activity 29 , 30 , 31 , although recent evidence suggests the total energy expended for physical activity has not declined in recent decades 32 , 33 , indicating that the increased energy cost of moving the greater body mass offset any decline in the level of activity. Basal metabolic rate (BMR), however, adjusted for changes in body composition, decreased over many decades and, therefore, may have contributed to the energy imbalance 32 . Also, the reduction in the level of physical activity may have contributed to obesity indirectly, by stimulating appetite and energy intake when decreased below some threshold 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 . Be that as it may, elevated food intake is considered the primary driver of obesity in the EBM 38 . Specifically, the widespread availability and marketing of a wide variety of inexpensive, convenient, calorie-dense, ultraprocessed and highly palatable foods, often in large portion sizes, that are low in fibre and protein leads to eating beyond the body’s energy and nutrient demands.

The energy and nutrient needs of the body are transmitted to the brain where these signals are integrated with signals from the environment to control food intake. Modern food (1) (particularly energy-dense ultraprocessed foods (UPF), sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) and foods rich in fat and sugar and low in protein and fibre) disrupts the signals and/or sensing of the supply and demand of energy and nutrients (2), resulting in increased food intake (3) and subsequently increased metabolisable energy, exceeding energy requirements. The excess energy is mainly stored in adipose tissue (4) but also in lean tissues of the body (5). Concomitant to weight gain, energy expenditure increases (6). Refer to the legend in Fig. 1 for other abbreviations.

The EBM posits that external, food-related cues along with properties of the foods themselves (step 1 in Fig. 2 ) either disrupt the signals of energy and nutrient availability and demand or alter the brain’s sensing and integration of these signals or both (step 2). As a result, caloric overconsumption relative to energy requirements ensues (step 3), and the normal physiology of fuel partitioning results in most of the excess energy, regardless of the macronutrient source, being stored as body fat (step 4) and, to a lesser extent, as lean mass (step 5). Therefore, whole-body BMR and total energy expenditure increase (step 6) as obesity develops, because more energy is required to support and move the greater body weight. Body composition-adjusted expenditure, however, remains unaltered (that is, the metabolic activity of different tissues per unit mass does not change as obesity develops in an individual), although there is an additional small amount of energy expended that is associated with the cost of tissue deposition 39 .

Attributes of the modern food environment that, according to the EBM, are believed to be most responsible for driving food choices and cause excess energy intake, and the biological mechanisms by which these factors alter the brain circuits controlling food intake are beginning to be elucidated 40 , 41 , 42 . The tight regulation of protein intake interacting with dietary protein dilution (‘protein leverage’) 9 and interactions between gut signals and brain regions supporting food reward (broadly defined and not limited to hedonics 43 ) and hypothalamic regions supporting homeostatic control of food intake are particularly intriguing 44 , 45 , 46 .

The EBM allows for calorie-independent, macronutrient-specific effects on peripheral hormones, metabolism and substrate oxidation but posits that excess energy intake results in similar net fat deposition in adipose tissue regardless of the macronutrient composition of the diet 38 . Adipose tissue expansion in an individual according to the EBM is, therefore, a downstream consequence of increased dietary energy intake. The historical increase in obesity prevalence in the population is potentially exacerbated by declining tissue metabolic activity (that is, body composition-adjusted BMR) over time, due to some as yet unidentified factor(s) 32 , which augments positive energy balance.

According to the CIM (Fig. 3 ), the primary cause of increased obesity prevalence is an alteration in fuel partitioning that favours channelling of ingested energy-yielding substrates away from pathways of oxidation toward storage in adipose and perhaps other tissues. This metabolic shift is perceived by the brain as a state of lack of energy, leading to decreased energy expenditure or increased food intake to compensate, eventually resulting in obesity 47 , 48 , 49 .

The availability of fuels in some key locations around the body, particularly the bloodstream, is monitored by the brain, and energy expenditure and/or food intake are adjusted accordingly. Modern food (1) (particularly refined carbohydrates with high glycaemic index and glycaemic load (GI/GL)) alters fuel partitioning (2) under the influence of increased insulin-to-glucagon ratio and decreased GLP1-to-GIP ratio. This results in sequestration of fuels in adipose tissue, liver and muscle (3) and, subsequently, reduced availability of energy-yielding substrates such as glucose, free fatty acids (FFA) and ketone bodies in the bloodstream (4). This is perceived by the brain as a state of internal starvation (5), eliciting compensatory responses, including decreased energy expenditure (6) and/or increased hunger and food consumption (7). Refer to the legend in Fig. 1 for other abbreviations.

Increased deposition of energy in the body is facilitated by qualitative (and at least partially calorie-independent) aspects of the modern diet, particularly, a high intake of refined, rapidly digestible carbohydrate-containing foods (with high glycaemic index and load), exacerbated by increased consumption of foods and beverages that are rich in fructose (step 1 in Fig. 3 ). Meals with a high glycaemic index cause greater-than-normal increases in the ratio of insulin to glucagon and elicit other hormonal responses (for example, a decreased GLP1-to-GIP ratio) that accentuate the stimulation of anabolic pathways and the suppression of catabolic pathways that normally occur early in the postprandial state (for example, upregulation of lipogenesis and downregulation of lipolysis and fatty acid oxidation). Altered routing and partitioning of energy-yielding substrates (step 2), initially postprandially but eventually manifesting at all times of the day, leads to increased energy storage in tissues (step 3). Consequent to this sequestration of energy, the concentration of circulating metabolic fuels, such as glucose, free fatty acids and ketone bodies, is reduced several hours after eating (step 4) during the dynamic phase of weight gain, signalling low energy availability to the brain (step 5). This results in decreased energy expenditure as a result of suppressed tissue metabolic activity (step 6) and/or in increased hunger and food intake (step 7).

The most likely response under free-living, ad libitum eating conditions is an increase in food consumption, which tends to prevent a decrease in energy expenditure from manifesting 47 , 48 . According to the CIM, therefore, the shift away from oxidation toward storage and energy sequestration is upstream of the positive energy balance that accompanies chronic weight gain. During the static phase of weight gain, insulin resistance in adipose and other tissues results in elevations in metabolic fuels throughout the postprandial and postabsorptive periods.

Comparing the EBM and the CIM

There is a considerable amount of evidence from animal studies, genetic studies, observational studies and experimental studies in humans with various diet interventions but also medications that can be used to support or refute both the EBM and the CIM 38 , 48 . Evaluating the robustness of all these studies fell outside the scope and the time frame of the workshop. Instead, the focus was on identifying commonalities and differences.

Agreement between models

Humans consume food for many reasons, but fundamentally they do so to meet the needs of the body for energy and nutrients, which, in some circumstances, serves to replenish body fat stores or to functionally anticipate future needs. The two models do not disagree on this physiological background. Furthermore, both models agree that transient imbalances in energy or macronutrient availability in the body, regardless of how they are initiated, occur on a daily basis but cause only miniscule effects on net fat storage, which can be offset over subsequent days. In the context of obesity development, cumulative net imbalances in energy or macronutrients are required over prolonged periods of time. Both models recognize that longer time scales are most relevant for understanding obesity and try to explain why obesity develops in individuals and why its prevalence increased in recent decades in the population, within this overall physiological framework. The focus of the two models is on different components of the food environment that eventually lead to excess adiposity, that is, either on the ubiquitous, calorie-dense, ultraprocessed foods that are high in rewarding nutrient combinations rarely appearing in nature, such as certain mixtures of fat and sugar, fat and salt, and carbohydrates and salt (EBM), or on high-glycaemic index carbohydrate-containing foods and fructose-rich beverages (CIM).

The models recognize the potential role of many biological factors (for example, genetic predisposition, foetal programming, gut microbiome), behavioural factors (for example, physical activity, sleep patterns, weight cycling, medication use), psychosocial factors (for example, income, education, occupation) and environmental factors (for example, endocrine-disrupting chemicals, viruses, built environment) that may contribute to obesity in some individuals. Any such factor, however, dietary or other, must manifest itself through a biological mechanism that eventually alters energy intake, energy expenditure or substrate partitioning and thereby leads to net fat accumulation, adipose tissue expansion, weight gain and obesity. Both the EBM and the CIM provide plausible frameworks for this to happen, although there are some important differences between the two.

Points of divergence

One key difference between the two models rests on the point of entry of the modern food ‘insult’ (or any other causal factor) into the physiological system regulating energy metabolism and ultimately controlling fat storage (Figs. 2 and 3 ). The EBM posits that this happens in the brain (that is, an overwhelming food environment alters the sensing of energy supply and demand), whereas the CIM posits that this happens in the periphery (that is, the modern food environment alters fuel partitioning).

A second, fundamental difference that follows is that, according to the EBM, the ability of the brain to control food intake is overwhelmed or disrupted by the food environment, resulting in increased energy intake despite internal signals of energy sufficiency. By contrast, according to the CIM, the ability of the brain to control food intake remains intact, which is why food consumption increases and/or energy expenditure decreases in response to internal cues signalling less available energy resulting from altered fuel partitioning in the periphery.

A third important difference is that the CIM predicts a reduction in energy expenditure and/or a loss of lean mass if the individual resists the drive to eat more or if not enough food is available, but no change or even an increase in energy expenditure and lean mass if food intake increases, which is the most likely response 47 . Thus, the CIM allows for increased adiposity to be initiated without an increase in energy intake over a baseline during which fat stores are stable. On the other hand, the EBM predicts an increase in lean mass and whole-body energy expenditure concomitant to greater food intake and weight gain but no change in weight or energy expenditure (at the whole-body level or when adjusted for body composition) with unchanged energy intake. Thus, an increase in food intake is the initiating factor of increased adiposity in the EBM.

Differences between the EBM and the CIM (Table 2 ) and their predictions provide opportunities for model testing and should inform the design of appropriate experiments. However, direct testing of each model is not always possible. For example, while the EBM regards changes in energy expenditure as a consequence of increased food intake and obesity, the CIM places alterations in energy expenditure in the causal pathway for obesity. Still, this fundamental conceptual difference is not easy to test, as alterations in energy expenditure at the cellular or tissue levels are temporal in nature and will depend on the stage of obesity development and the concomitant changes in food intake and will likely be undetectable at the whole-body level by current methodologies and instrumentation.

Nevertheless, differences between the two models are not simply semantic in nature (offering divergent views about the direction of causality) but may have important implications for the management of obesity 50 . Reducing the prevalence of obesity from the EBM perspective might prioritize addressing factors that promote increased energy intake and facilitate induction of positive energy balance. Interventions might need to focus primarily on re-engineering the local or broader food environment to promote the availability of affordable, convenient, high-quality foods and to reduce the availability and marketing of foods high in energy density, with particularly rewarding nutrient mixtures, large portion sizes and low protein and fibre contents. By contrast, reducing obesity prevalence from the CIM perspective might prioritize addressing factors that affect substrate partitioning by modifying dietary composition, for example, by limiting the consumption of high-glycaemic index carbohydrate foods and fructose-rich beverages, without the need for a primary focus on decreasing total energy intake. The implications reach beyond research to individual obesity management in clinical practice, food marketing, policymaking and dietary guidelines to the public.

From physiological models of energy metabolism regulation to the epidemic of obesity

Physiological models of any disorder, such as obesity, are conceptual representations of the system (here, the human body and its environment) that trace the chain of events leading to the disorder and attempt to disentangle the initiating and driving forces, to outline interdependencies between intrinsic and extrinsic factors (for example, genetic predisposition, susceptibility, environmental influences) and to describe cause-and-effect relationships. A model should be consistent with a set of observations and allow for the construction of testable hypotheses, thereby informing the design of appropriate experiments that are capable of confirming or refuting explicit and, ideally, precise predictions. Importantly, when applied to disease trends, prevention and treatment, a model should be able to explain changes in prevalence and perhaps even be able to predict the outcome upon altering the values of one or more parameters in the system 7 .

Admittedly, conceptual representations of the physiology of energy metabolism regulation in humans are not likely adequate to explain phenomena occurring at a global level that have important psychosocial and sociocultural dimensions 51 , 52 . Accordingly, such factors may well be responsible for the epidemic of obesity; however, testing this hypothesis in a definitive manner will be a very difficult, if not an impossible task. Nevertheless, even psychosocial and sociocultural factors must eventually act on individual biology to drive increased deposition of fat in the body, and the issue remains whether these factors promote obesity via purely behavioural effects (that is, increased food intake), via changes in hormonal milieu and fuel partitioning, or both.

The above lines notwithstanding, knowing the cause of a disease does not necessarily mean that removing that cause will treat the disease; although, it should certainly help prevent it. As an analogy, smoking may cause lung cancer, but stopping smoking does not treat lung cancer, although it likely decreases the risk of developing it. The implication of this relationship for obesity is that elucidating which component (if any) of the modern food environment is responsible for weight gain does not mean that removing that component from the diet will help treat obesity. However, it will likely help prevent the epidemic in parts of the world where obesity is still a comparatively smaller public health issue, such as Africa, Southeast Asia (for example, India) and the Western Pacific (for example, China) 53 , and it may also help prevent the development of obesity early in life, for example, among children and adolescents. Conversely, delineating the characteristics of the optimal diet for weight loss does not de facto mean that a diet with the opposite characteristics causes weight gain and obesity.

Open questions and directions for future research

While testing the components and proposed pathways of the EBM and the CIM is necessary, it might not be sufficient to understand the obesity epidemic, which could also be rooted in sociocultural factors. Different mechanisms could lead to obesity in different individuals, operate at different stages of the natural course of the disorder and contribute to the slow progression and persistence of this phenotype. Eventually, a plausible theory, based on available data and confirmed by appropriate experiments, will be needed that can explain the historical development of obesity at the global level within the framework of each model. Such a theory will help understand the causes of obesity and inform effective approaches for its prevention and treatment.

Epidemiological, ecological and cross-sectional observational analyses might point to potential factors that differentiate between the two models 38 , 48 , but results from such studies are too confounded to be used for comparative model testing and mutually exclusive argumentation. We argue that more experimental research in humans is needed that, together with longitudinal cohorts and studies in animal models, can offer valuable insights, provide answers to key overarching questions and test specific assumptions and predictions of the EBM and the CIM (Table 3 ).

Although questions ideally should be relatively easy to formulate, designing the appropriate experiments to test the relevant hypotheses is challenging and not always possible. This is particularly true for human experimental nutrition research 54 , for reasons related to cost, sample size, duration of the intervention, metabolic adaptations, level of control over dietary intake and other behaviours (for example, physical activity), dietary compliance, issues of efficacy versus effectiveness, imprecision of the tools used for the measurement of outcomes and small effect sizes, to name a few. Experiments in animals are devoid of many of these limitations, however, oftentimes at the expense of poor translatability when it comes to interventions aimed at both preventing and treating obesity 55 .

We suggest that, to move the field forward, it will be important to conduct (1) highly controlled feeding trials in domiciled volunteers (ideally, with diet arms lasting several weeks) with deep metabolic phenotyping to discover the mechanisms and reliably dissect transient from adaptive responses, (2) dietary interventions in free-living individuals (for 12–24 months) with adequate intensity and support to facilitate long-term behaviour change and diet adherence and evaluate ‘real-world’ effects (even though we recognize that the value of such studies in the context of determining which paradigm is correct is limited), (3) longitudinal cohort studies (lasting 5–20 years) with genotyping and frequent assessments of energy intake, energy expenditure, body composition and a variety of metabolic measures to gain insight into the temporal relationship between metabolic alterations and body fat accumulation and to assess genetic and phenotypic predictors of future weight gain and (4) studies in animal models to test putative mechanisms informed by observations from human studies (that is, from humans to mice).

Currently, a major obstacle to conducting definitive dietary trials to test the components and validate the EBM and the CIM is lack of funding. For instance, a phase 3 trial for a single pharmacological agent (including drugs for obesity) costs a median of ~20 million USD or >40,000 USD per participant 56 , whereas the vast majority of dietary trials funded by the NIH must make do with budgets <10% of that amount (for example, 1,000–3,000 USD per participant in the Look AHEAD trial depending on the intensity of the intervention) 57 . Consequently, these trials typically lack adequate control of the experimental conditions or high intensity of the interventions (for example, full diet provision, frequent behavioural support) or do not last sufficiently long (that is, years) 54 . Better funding for novel, innovative, highly rigorous dietary intervention trials is, therefore, necessary. Importantly, scientists with contrasting opinions should strive to jointly design, carry out and interpret such studies to increase their credibility. Such ‘adversarial collaborations’ would be facilitated by maintenance of a respectful and collegial tone among all parties to this debate.

Conclusions

Since the early 1970s, when scientists met in London 58 and Bethesda 59 to discuss the ‘causes of obesity’, we have discovered many potential pieces of the puzzle of obesity pathogenesis in humans. Half a century later, in October 2022, when scientists gathered again in a Royal Society Meeting to discuss the same topic ( https://royalsociety.org/science-events-and-lectures/2022/10/causes-obesity/ ) 60 , 61 , we had realized that the causes of obesity are exceedingly complex and still remain largely unknown, despite half a century of expanding knowledge.

What became clear during the Copenhagen workshop in 2023 is that getting scientists with opposing views together, stepping out of one’s comfort zone, keeping an open mind and accepting that any hypothesis may be right or wrong until rigorously, repeatedly and independently tested, is critically important for advancing science. A need for mutually agreed testing of the models emerged, which requires model assumptions and predictions to be made explicit and precise. Looking beyond the food environment is also necessary to discover external factors that may have been undervalued or even overlooked. Designing appropriate experiments and funding ambitious interventions are needed to understand the mechanisms leading to obesity and the intrinsic and extrinsic factors that are involved in the pathogenesis of this disorder.

It is our hope that research and discovery will pave the way, and appropriate strategies and policies for prevention and treatment will follow, so that the next generation of scientists need not gather after another 50 years to discuss, yet again, the ‘causes of obesity’! Or at least, if they do so, they will have more answers than those currently available.

Magkos, F. & Astrup, A. Dietary carbohydrate, energy expenditure, and weight loss: is eating less and burning more possible? J. Nutr. 151 , 468–470 (2021).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Sørensen, T. I. A. Challenges in the study of causation of obesity. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 68 , 43–54 (2009).

Taubes, G. The science of obesity: what do we really know about what makes us fat? An essay by Gary Taubes. B MJ 346 , 16–19 (2013).

Google Scholar  

Torres-Carot, V., Suarez-Gonzalez, A. & Lobato-Foulques, C. The energy balance hypothesis of obesity: do the laws of thermodynamics explain excessive adiposity? Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 76 , 1374–1379 (2022).

Heindel, J. J., Lustig, R. H., Howard, S. & Corkey, B. E. Obesogens: a unifying theory for the global rise in obesity. Int. J. Obes. 48 , 449–460 (2024).

Article   Google Scholar  

Dhurandhar, N. V., Petersen, K. S. & Webster, C. Key causes and contributors of obesity: a perspective. Nurs. Clin. North Am. 56 , 449–464 (2021).

Flier, J. S. Moderating ‘the great debate’: the carbohydrate–insulin vs. the energy balance models of obesity. Cell Metab. 35 , 737–741 (2023).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Taubes, G. How a ‘fatally, tragically flawed’ paradigm has derailed the science of obesity. STAT www.statnews.com/2021/09/13/how-a-fatally-tragically-flawed-paradigm-has-derailed-the-science-of-obesity/ (13 September 2021).

Raubenheimer, D. & Simpson, S. J. Protein appetite as an integrator in the obesity system: the protein leverage hypothesis. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 378 , 20220212 (2023).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hemmingsson, E., Nowicka, P., Ulijaszek, S. & Sørensen, T. I. A. The social origins of obesity within and across generations. Obes. Rev. 24 , e13514 (2023).

Koch, C. A. et al. Climate change and obesity. Horm. Metab. Res. 53 , 575–587 (2021).

Akheruzzaman, M., Hegde, V. & Dhurandhar, N. V. Twenty-five years of research about adipogenic adenoviruses: a systematic review. Obes. Rev. 20 , 499–509 (2019).

Grannell, A., Kokkinos, A. & le Roux, C. W. Myokines in appetite control and energy balance. Muscles 1 , 26–47 (2022).

Miller, G. D. Appetite regulation: hormones, peptides, and neurotransmitters and their role in obesity. Am. J. Lifestyle Med. 13 , 586–601 (2019).

Hussain, S. et al. Glucokinase activity in the arcuate nucleus regulates glucose intake. J. Clin. Invest. 125 , 337–349 (2015).

Hwang, J. J. et al. Blunted rise in brain glucose levels during hyperglycemia in adults with obesity and T2DM. JCI Insight 2 , e95913 (2017).

Skvortsova, A., Veldhuijzen, D. S., Kloosterman, I. E. M., Pacheco-Lopez, G. & Evers, A. W. M. Food anticipatory hormonal responses: a systematic review of animal and human studies. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 126 , 447–464 (2021).

Turnbaugh, P. J. et al. An obesity-associated gut microbiome with increased capacity for energy harvest. Nature 444 , 1027–1031 (2006).

Corbin, K. D. et al. Host–diet–gut microbiome interactions influence human energy balance: a randomized clinical trial. Nat. Commun. 14 , 3161 (2023).

Frayn, K. N. & Akanji, A. O. Integration of metabolism 2: macronutrients. In Nutrition and Metabolism (eds Lanham-New, S. A. et al.) Ch. 4, 49–71 (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011).

Frayn, K. N. & Evans, R. Human Metabolism: A Regulatory Perspective 4th edn (Wiley-Blackwell, 2020).

Prentice, A. M. Macronutrients as sources of food energy. Public Health Nutr. 8 , 932–939 (2005).

Ang, T., Bruce, C. R. & Kowalski, G. M. Postprandial aminogenic insulin and glucagon secretion can stimulate glucose flux in humans. Diabetes 68 , 939–946 (2019).

Oberoi, A. et al. Comparative effects of co-ingesting whey protein and glucose alone and combined on blood glucose, plasma insulin and glucagon concentrations in younger and older men. Nutrients 14 , 3111 (2022).

Wikarek, T., Kocelak, P., Owczarek, A. J., Chudek, J. & Olszanecka-Glinianowicz, M. Effect of dietary macronutrients on postprandial glucagon and insulin release in obese and normal-weight women. Int. J. Endocrinol. 2020 , 4603682 (2020).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Radulescu, A., Gannon, M. C. & Nuttall, F. Q. The effect on glucagon, glucagon-like peptide-1, total and acyl-ghrelin of dietary fats ingested with and without potato. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 95 , 3385–3391 (2010).

Gill, S. & Panda, S. A smartphone app reveals erratic diurnal eating patterns in humans that can be modulated for health benefits. Cell Metab. 22 , 789–798 (2015).

Farsijani, S., Mao, Z., Cauley, J. A. & Newman, A. B. Comprehensive assessment of chrononutrition behaviors among nationally representative adults: insights from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data. Clin. Nutr. 42 , 1910–1921 (2023).

Egger, G. J., Vogels, N. & Westerterp, K. R. Estimating historical changes in physical activity levels. Med. J. Aust. 175 , 635–636 (2001).

Archer, E. et al. 45-Year trends in women’s use of time and household management energy expenditure. PLoS ONE 8 , e56620 (2013).

Church, T. S. et al. Trends over 5 decades in U.S. occupation-related physical activity and their associations with obesity. PLoS ONE 6 , e19657 (2011).

Speakman, J. R. et al. Total daily energy expenditure has declined over the past three decades due to declining basal expenditure, not reduced activity expenditure. Nat. Metab. 5 , 579–588 (2023).

Westerterp, K. R. & Speakman, J. R. Physical activity energy expenditure has not declined since the 1980s and matches energy expenditures of wild mammals. Int. J. Obes. 32 , 1256–1263 (2008).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Beaulieu, K., Hopkins, M., Blundell, J. & Finlayson, G. Does habitual physical activity increase the sensitivity of the appetite control system? A systematic review. Sports Med. 46 , 1897–1919 (2016).

Hand, G. A. & Blair, S. N. Energy flux and its role in obesity and metabolic disease. Eur. Endocrinol. 10 , 131–135 (2014).

Mayer, J., Roy, P. & Mitra, K. P. Relation between caloric intake, body weight, and physical work: studies in an industrial male population in West Bengal. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 4 , 169–175 (1956).

Melby, C. L., Paris, H. L., Sayer, R. D., Bell, C. & Hill, J. O. Increasing energy flux to maintain diet-induced weight loss. Nutrients 11 , 2533 (2019).

Hall, K. D. et al. The energy balance model of obesity: beyond calories in, calories out. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 115 , 1243–1254 (2022).

Hall, K. D. Mathematical modelling of energy expenditure during tissue deposition. Br. J. Nutr. 104 , 4–7 (2010).

Alcantara, I. C., Tapia, A. P. M., Aponte, Y. & Krashes, M. J. Acts of appetite: neural circuits governing the appetitive, consummatory, and terminating phases of feeding. Nat. Metab. 4 , 836–847 (2022).

Berthoud, H. R., Morrison, C. D., Ackroff, K. & Sclafani, A. Learning of food preferences: mechanisms and implications for obesity & metabolic diseases. Int. J. Obes. 45 , 2156–2168 (2021).

Berthoud, H. R., Morrison, C. D. & Munzberg, H. The obesity epidemic in the face of homeostatic body weight regulation: what went wrong and how can it be fixed? Physiol. Behav. 222 , 112959 (2020).

de Araujo, I. E., Schatzker, M. & Small, D. M. Rethinking food reward. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 71 , 139–164 (2020).

Alhadeff, A. L. et al. Natural and drug rewards engage distinct pathways that converge on coordinated hypothalamic and reward circuits. Neuron 103 , 891–908 (2019).

Mazzone, C. M. et al. High-fat food biases hypothalamic and mesolimbic expression of consummatory drives. Nat. Neurosci. 23 , 1253–1266 (2020).

McDougle, M. et al. Separate gut–brain circuits for fat and sugar reinforcement combine to promote overeating. Cell Metab. 36 , 393–407 (2024).

Ludwig, D. S. et al. The carbohydrate–insulin model: a physiological perspective on the obesity pandemic. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 114 , 1873–1885 (2021).

Ludwig, D. S. et al. Competing paradigms of obesity pathogenesis: energy balance versus carbohydrate–insulin models. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 76 , 1209–1221 (2022).

Friedman, M. I., Sørensen, T. I. A., Taubes, G., Lund, J. & Ludwig, D. S. Trapped fat: obesity pathogenesis as an intrinsic disorder in metabolic fuel partitioning. Obes. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.13795 (2024).

Ludwig, D. S. & Sørensen, T. I. A. An integrated model of obesity pathogenesis that revisits causal direction. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 18 , 261–262 (2022).

Lee, A., Cardel, M. & Donahoo, W. T. In Endotext (eds Feingold, K. R. et al.) (MDText.com, 2000).

Althoff, T. et al. Large-scale physical activity data reveal worldwide activity inequality. Nature 547 , 336–339 (2017).

Chooi, Y. C., Ding, C. & Magkos, F. The epidemiology of obesity. Metabolism 92 , 6–10 (2019).

Hall, K. D. Challenges of human nutrition research. Science 367 , 1298–1300 (2020).

Thivel, D. et al. Surgical weight loss: impact on energy expenditure. Obes. Surg. 23 , 255–266 (2013).

Moore, T. J., Zhang, H., Anderson, G. & Alexander, G. C. Estimated costs of pivotal trials for novel therapeutic agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, 2015–2016. JAMA Intern. Med. 178 , 1451–1457 (2018).

Rushing, J. et al. Cost of intervention delivery in a lifestyle weight loss trial in type 2 diabetes: results from the Look AHEAD clinical trial. Obes. Sci. Pract. 3 , 15–24 (2017).

Burland, W. L., Samuel, P. D. & Yudkin, J. Obesity Symposium: Proceedings of a Servier Research Institute Symposium Held in December 1973 (Churchill Livingstone, 1974).

Bray, G. A. Obesity in Perspective: A Conference Sponsored by the John E. Fogarty International Center for Advanced Study in the Health Sciences (US Government Printing Office, 1975).

Speakman, J. R., Sørensen, T. I. A., Hall, K. D. & Allison, D. B. Causes of Obesity: Theories, Conjectures and Evidence — Part I (The Royal Society Publishing, 2023).

Sørensen, T. I. A., Speakman, J. R., Hall, K. D. & Allison, D. B. Causes of Obesity: Theories, Conjectures and Evidence — Part II (The Royal Society Publishing, 2023).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The workshop and this paper were made possible with initiative and funding from the Novo Nordisk Foundation. We thank E. M. Krogh and M. Kanda (Novo Nordisk Foundation) for organizing the practical details of the workshop, J. S. Bang (Strategize) for moderating the discussions and B.J. Gehm (University of Copenhagen) for keeping minutes.

Author information

David S. Ludwig

Present address: Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark

Faidon Magkos

Novo Nordisk Foundation Center for Basic Metabolic Research, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Thorkild I. A. Sørensen, Ruth J. F. Loos & Christoffer Clemmensen

Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Thorkild I. A. Sørensen

Center for Childhood Health, Copenhagen, Denmark

Charles Perkins Centre and School of Life and Environmental Sciences, the University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

David Raubenheimer

Department of Nutritional Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA

Nikhil V. Dhurandhar

Institute of Human Nutrition and Food Science, Kiel University, Kiel, Germany

Anja Bosy-Westphal

Department of Obesity and Nutritional Sciences, Novo Nordisk Foundation, Hellerup, Denmark

Mads F. Hjorth & Arne Astrup

School of Public Health, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, USA

David B. Allison

Independent journalist, Oakland, CA, USA

Gary Taubes

Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

Eric Ravussin

Monell Chemical Senses Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Mark I. Friedman

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD, USA

Kevin D. Hall

New Balance Foundation Obesity Prevention Center, Boston Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China

John R. Speakman

University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

F.M. drafted the manuscript and created the visual elements; M.I.F., K.D.H., D.S.L. and J.R.S. critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content; T.I.A.S., D.R., N.V.D., R.J.F.L., A.B.-W., C.C., M.F.H., D.B.A., G.T., E.R. and A.A. revised the manuscript; all authors who attended the meeting contributed to the discussions during the workshop. All authors provided input and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Faidon Magkos .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

F.M., T.I.A.S., N.V.D., A.B.-W., M.F.H., E.R., M.I.F., K.D.H., J.R.S. and A.A. have nothing to declare. M.F.H. and A.A. are full-time employees of the Novo Nordisk Foundation. R.J.F.L. has been an advisory board member and speaker for Ely Lilly and the Novo Nordisk Foundation, for which she has received payments. C.C. is a cofounder of Ousia Pharma, a biotechnology company developing therapeutics for the treatment of obesity. D.R., G.T. and D.S.L. have authored books for the public about food intake, diets and their relationship with health and disease. D.B.A. has received personal payments or promises for the same from Amin, Talati, Wasserman for KSF Acquisition (Glanbia); General Mills; Kaleido Biosciences; the Law Offices of Ronald Marron; the Novo Nordisk Foundation; and Zero Longevity Science (as stock options). Donations to a foundation have been made on his behalf by the Northarvest Bean Growers Association, Communique. D.B.A.’s institution, Indiana University, and the Indiana University Foundation have received funds or donations to support his research or educational activities from the Alliance for Potato Research and Education, the American Egg Board, Arnold Ventures, Eli Lilly and Company, Mars, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, the National Pork Board, Pfizer, the USDA, WW (formerly Weight Watchers) and numerous other for-profit and non-profit organisations.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature Metabolism thanks Leonie Heilbronn, An Pan and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editor: Christoph Schmitt, in collaboration with the Nature Metabolism team.

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.

Magkos, F., Sørensen, T.I.A., Raubenheimer, D. et al. On the pathogenesis of obesity: causal models and missing pieces of the puzzle. Nat Metab (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42255-024-01106-8

Download citation

Received : 03 May 2024

Accepted : 10 July 2024

Published : 20 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s42255-024-01106-8

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

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

On Human Motor Coordination: The Synergy Expansion Hypothesis

• Find this author on Google Scholar
• Find this author on PubMed
• Search for this author on this site
• ORCID record for Federico Tessari
• For correspondence: [email protected]
• ORCID record for Neville Hogan
• Info/History
• Preview PDF

The search for an answer to Bernstein's degrees of freedom problem has propelled a large portion of research studies in human motor control over the past six decades. Different theories have been developed to explain how humans might use their incredibly complex neuro-musculo-skeletal system with astonishing ease. Among these theories, motor synergies appeared as one possible explanation. In this work, the authors investigate the nature and role of synergies and propose a new theoretical framework, namely the 'expansion hypothesis', to answer Bernstein's problem. The expansion hypothesis is articulated in three propositions: mechanical, developmental, and behavioral. Each proposition addresses a different question on the nature of synergies: (i) How many synergies can humans have? (ii) How do we learn and develop synergies? (iii) How do we use synergies? An example numerical simulation is presented and analyzed to clarify the hypothesis propositions. The expansion hypothesis is contextualized with respect to the existing literature on motor synergies both in healthy and impaired individuals, as well as other prominent theories in human motor control and development. The expansion hypothesis provides a novel framework to better comprehend and explain the nature, use and evolution of human motor skills.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Updated version with a contextualization with respect to the theory of motor sequencing and chunking as well as new results.

View the discussion thread.

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Citation Manager Formats

• EndNote (tagged)
• EndNote 8 (xml)
• RefWorks Tagged
• Ref Manager
• Tweet Widget
• Facebook Like
• Google Plus One

Subject Area

• Neuroscience
• Animal Behavior and Cognition (5552)
• Biochemistry (12614)
• Bioengineering (9492)
• Bioinformatics (30932)
• Biophysics (15909)
• Cancer Biology (12985)
• Cell Biology (18579)
• Clinical Trials (138)
• Developmental Biology (10047)
• Ecology (15028)
• Epidemiology (2067)
• Evolutionary Biology (19216)
• Genetics (12783)
• Genomics (17601)
• Immunology (12744)
• Microbiology (29813)
• Molecular Biology (12424)
• Neuroscience (64968)
• Paleontology (483)
• Pathology (2010)
• Pharmacology and Toxicology (3473)
• Physiology (5364)
• Plant Biology (11139)
• Scientific Communication and Education (1730)
• Synthetic Biology (3070)
• Systems Biology (7709)
• Zoology (1735)

Newspaper Article References

This page contains reference examples for newspaper articles, including the following:

• Newspaper article
• Comment on an online newspaper article

1. Newspaper article

Carey, B. (2019, March 22). Can we get better at forgetting? The New York Times . https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/22/health/memory-forgetting-psychology.html

Harlan, C. (2013, April 2). North Korea vows to restart shuttered nuclear reactor that can make bomb-grade plutonium. The Washington Post , A1, A4.

Stobbe, M. (2020, January 8). Cancer death rate in U.S. sees largest one-year drop ever. Chicago Tribune .

• Parenthetical citations : (Carey, 2019; Harlan, 2013; Stobbe, 2020)
• Narrative citations : Carey (2019), Harlan (2013), and Stobbe (2020)
• In the source element of the reference, provide at minimum the title of the newspaper in italic title case.
• If the newspaper article is from an online newspaper that has a URL that will resolve for readers (as in the Carey example), include the URL of the article at the end of the reference. If volume, issue, and/or page numbers for the article are missing, omit these elements from the reference.
• If you used a print version of the newspaper article (as in the Harlan example), provide the page or pages of the article after the newspaper title. Do not include the abbreviations “p.” or “pp.” before the page(s).
• If the newspaper article is from an academic research database, provide the title of the newspaper and any volume, issue, and/or page numbers that are available for the article. Do not include database information in the reference. If the article does not have volume, issue, or page numbers available, the reference in this case ends with the title of the newspaper (as in the Stobbe example).
• If the article is from a news website (e.g., CNN, HuffPost)—one that does not have an associated daily or weekly newspaper—use the format for a webpage on a news website instead.

2. Comment on an online newspaper article

sidneyf. (2020, October 7). Oh, I don’t know; perhaps the common-sense conclusion that packing people together — for hours — like sardines — may be an [Comment on the article “When will it be safe to travel again?”]. The Washington Post . https://wapo.st/3757UlS

• Parenthetical citation : sidneyf (2020)
• Narrative citation : sidneyf (2020)
• Credit the person who left the comment as the author using the format that appears with the comment (i.e., a real name or a username). The example shows a username.
• Provide the comment title or up to the first 20 words of the comment; then write “Comment on the article” and the title of the article on which the comment appeared (in quotation marks and sentence case, enclosed within square brackets).
• Link to the comment itself if possible. Either the full URL or a short URL is acceptable. The example shows a URL that the writer has shortened with the bitly URL shortening service.
• If the comment belongs to an article from a news website (e.g., CNN, HuffPost)—one that does not have an associated daily or weekly newspaper—use the format for a comment on a webpage on a news website.

Newspaper article references are covered in the seventh edition APA Style manuals in the Publication Manual Section 10.1 and the Concise Guide Section 10.1

• Elsevier|论文撰写

写作干货 | 手把手助你写好研究假设（Hypothesis）

研究假设（ hypothesis ） 是就实验项目的预期结果所做的简要叙述。研究者通过开展研究，来进一步证实或证伪该假设，从而让读者充分认可研究主题。研究假设作为文章开篇内容中的重要一环，影响着审稿人和读者对文章的第一印象，因而需要作者格外严谨与仔细地对待。  

本期，我们将深入探讨研究假设的撰写方法、特点以及相关案例，帮助科研者快速掌握研究假设的写作思路，一起来看看吧！  

如何撰写研究假设？  

在撰写研究假设前，作者可以先全面回顾现有文献，并找出该研究领域的知识空白或问题。而后，通过假设来提出可行的方案，再借助适用的实验方法来证明或反驳研究假设，最终得出研究结果。  

现在，让我们来看看 常见的研究假设写作示例 1 ：  

当研究旨在探讨两个变量之间的条件关系时  

研究假设可以采用 if/then （如果 / 则）格式，例如：  

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

  （ 如果 患者服用了 X 药物 ， 则 会在癌症治疗中 减少疲惫感 。）  

当研究假设旨在揭示两个变量之间的联系时  

可以采用 when X / then Y （当 X 时 / 然后 Y ）的格式，例如：  

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

（当员工在 大部分工作时间都久坐不动 时，他们的身体会 更加频繁地出现消化问题 。）  

直接陈述也是研究假设的一种表达形式  

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

（ X 药物和 Y 药物通过相同的化学途径，来降低认知能力下降的风险。）  

好的研究假设都有哪些特点？  

通常来说，科学严谨的研究假设会满足以下几个特点：  

保证在论文中研究假设将得到可观测、可检验的结果。  

表达尽量简洁且客观，避免冗长、主观的表达方式。  

清楚地反映出某一现象的已知部分和待解决的问题，并说明明该研究致力于填补的知识空白。  

了解零假设和备择假设  

为有助于统计分析，研究中通常会使用两种类型的假设 —— 零假设 （ null hypothesis ，又称为原假设）和 备择假设 （ alternative hypothesis ）。零假设通常在研究的初始阶段被假定为事实，研究者通过收集证据以推翻零假设，支持与之相对的备择假设。  

比如，研究人员在测试一种新药的疗效时，零假设为：该药物相较于非活性对照或安慰剂（ placebo ），没有任何药效。研究人员随后用实验数据推翻了该零假设，证实了这一假设相对的备择假设，即与非活性对照或安慰剂相比，新药是有药效的。  

接下来，我们再通过两个示例进一步了解 零假设与备择假设 ：  

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

（在除近期野火以外的所有因素得到控制后，去年 X 栖息地物种数量的下降速度与过去 100 年相比，并无不同。）  

在接下来的实验中，研究者将通过实验推翻这一零假设，以证实以下 备择假设 成立：  

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

（在除近期野火以外的所有因素得到控制后，去年 X 栖息地物种数量的下降速度与过去 100 年相比，出现了变化。）  

这一组零假设和备择假设将去年与过去 100 年间的物种数量下降速度进行统计比较，有助于通过之后的研究实验来对零假设进行证伪，也有助于就野火和物种减少这两个因素之间的关系得出科学有效的结论。  

最后，我们还建议研究者在撰写研究假设时，注意上下文之间的呼应与关联。研究假设往往与引言部分联系紧密 2 ，而引言中的其他内容，如研究背景，也同样会影响读者对研究假设相关性和有效性的判断。  

当然，除了提升写作技能，您还可以选择由 爱思唯尔语言服务 提供的专业指导和协助，省时省力更省心。我们以英语为母语的资深编辑，涵盖 100+ 学科背景，以顶刊标准帮助科研者更有效地提升包括研究背景在内的文章各部分与整体表达质量，全面提升论文品质，助力您的学术发表之旅！  

字数 Standard 最终价格: USD EUR JPY Follow this link if your manuscript is longer than 12,000 words. 上传

References  

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

投稿干货！学术论文应该用什么格式？

You may also like.

仅有论点还不够？论文写作中别忽视语气和结构

研究者必看！学术写作中如何使用包容性语言？

如何令论文“引”人入胜？助你写出让审稿人眼前一亮的引言

暴露局限反而能提升论文质量？这部分描述很重要！

论文越长就越好吗？教你如何用精练语言打动审稿人

超详细攻略：6步写出审稿人眼中的优秀Discussion

土木工程领域的论文怎样写才能深入浅出？5个窍门请收好

Input your search keywords and press Enter.