how to test a scientific hypothesis

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

Understanding Science

How science REALLY works...

• Understanding Science 101
• Misconceptions
• Testing ideas with evidence is at the heart of the process of science.
• Scientific testing involves figuring out what we would  expect  to observe if an idea were correct and comparing that expectation to what we  actually  observe.

Misconception:  Science proves ideas.

Misconception:  Science can only disprove ideas.

Correction:  Science neither proves nor disproves. It accepts or rejects ideas based on supporting and refuting evidence, but may revise those conclusions if warranted by new evidence or perspectives.  Read more about it.

Testing scientific ideas

Testing ideas about childbed fever.

As a simple example of how scientific testing works, consider the case of Ignaz Semmelweis, who worked as a doctor on a maternity ward in the 1800s. In his ward, an unusually high percentage of new mothers died of what was then called childbed fever. Semmelweis considered many possible explanations for this high death rate. Two of the many ideas that he considered were (1) that the fever was caused by mothers giving birth lying on their backs (as opposed to on their sides) and (2) that the fever was caused by doctors’ unclean hands (the doctors often performed autopsies immediately before examining women in labor). He tested these ideas by considering what expectations each idea generated. If it were true that childbed fever were caused by giving birth on one’s back, then changing procedures so that women labored on their sides should lead to lower rates of childbed fever. Semmelweis tried changing the position of labor, but the incidence of fever did not decrease; the actual observations did not match the expected results. If, however, childbed fever were caused by doctors’ unclean hands, having doctors wash their hands thoroughly with a strong disinfecting agent before attending to women in labor should lead to lower rates of childbed fever. When Semmelweis tried this, rates of fever plummeted; the actual observations matched the expected results, supporting the second explanation.

Testing in the tropics

Let’s take a look at another, very different, example of scientific testing: investigating the origins of coral atolls in the tropics. Consider the atoll Eniwetok (Anewetak) in the Marshall Islands — an oceanic ring of exposed coral surrounding a central lagoon. From the 1800s up until today, scientists have been trying to learn what supports atoll structures beneath the water’s surface and exactly how atolls form. Coral only grows near the surface of the ocean where light penetrates, so Eniwetok could have formed in several ways:

Hypothesis 2: The coral that makes up Eniwetok might have grown in a ring atop an underwater mountain already near the surface. The key to this hypothesis is the idea that underwater mountains don’t sink; instead the remains of dead sea animals (shells, etc.) accumulate on underwater mountains, potentially assisted by tectonic uplifting. Eventually, the top of the mountain/debris pile would reach the depth at which coral grow, and the atoll would form.

Which is a better explanation for Eniwetok? Did the atoll grow atop a sinking volcano, forming an underwater coral tower, or was the mountain instead built up until it neared the surface where coral were eventually able to grow? Which of these explanations is best supported by the evidence? We can’t perform an experiment to find out. Instead, we must figure out what expectations each hypothesis generates, and then collect data from the world to see whether our observations are a better match with one of the two ideas.

If Eniwetok grew atop an underwater mountain, then we would expect the atoll to be made up of a relatively thin layer of coral on top of limestone or basalt. But if it grew upwards around a subsiding island, then we would expect the atoll to be made up of many hundreds of feet of coral on top of volcanic rock. When geologists drilled into Eniwetok in 1951 as part of a survey preparing for nuclear weapons tests, the drill bored through more than 4000 feet (1219 meters) of coral before hitting volcanic basalt! The actual observation contradicted the underwater mountain explanation and matched the subsiding island explanation, supporting that idea. Of course, many other lines of evidence also shed light on the origins of coral atolls, but the surprising depth of coral on Eniwetok was particularly convincing to many geologists.

• Take a sidetrip

Visit the NOAA website to see an animation of coral atoll formation according to Hypothesis 1.

• Teaching resources

Scientists test hypotheses and theories. They are both scientific explanations for what we observe in the natural world, but theories deal with a much wider range of phenomena than do hypotheses. To learn more about the differences between hypotheses and theories, jump ahead to  Science at multiple levels .

• Use our  web interactive  to help students document and reflect on the process of science.
• Learn strategies for building lessons and activities around the Science Flowchart: Grades 3-5 Grades 6-8 Grades 9-12 Grades 13-16
• Find lesson plans for introducing the Science Flowchart to your students in: Grades 3-5 Grades 6-8 Grades 9-16
• Get  graphics and pdfs of the Science Flowchart  to use in your classroom. Translations are available in Spanish, French, Japanese, and Swahili.

Observation beyond our eyes

The logic of scientific arguments

Subscribe to our newsletter

• The science flowchart
• Science stories
• Grade-level teaching guides
• Teaching resource database
• Journaling tool

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

Biology library

Course: biology library   >   unit 1, the scientific method.

• Controlled experiments
• The scientific method and experimental design

Introduction

• Make an observation.
• Ask a question.
• Form a hypothesis , or testable explanation.
• Make a prediction based on the hypothesis.
• Test the prediction.
• Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions.

Scientific method example: Failure to toast

1. make an observation..

• Observation: the toaster won't toast.

2. Ask a question.

• Question: Why won't my toaster toast?

3. Propose a hypothesis.

• Hypothesis: Maybe the outlet is broken.

4. Make predictions.

• Prediction: If I plug the toaster into a different outlet, then it will toast the bread.

5. Test the predictions.

• Test of prediction: Plug the toaster into a different outlet and try again.
• If the toaster does toast, then the hypothesis is supported—likely correct.
• If the toaster doesn't toast, then the hypothesis is not supported—likely wrong.

Logical possibility

Practical possibility, building a body of evidence, 6. iterate..

• Iteration time!
• If the hypothesis was supported, we might do additional tests to confirm it, or revise it to be more specific. For instance, we might investigate why the outlet is broken.
• If the hypothesis was not supported, we would come up with a new hypothesis. For instance, the next hypothesis might be that there's a broken wire in the toaster.

Want to join the conversation?

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

• How it works

Hypothesis Testing – A Complete Guide with Examples

Published by Alvin Nicolas at August 14th, 2021 , Revised On October 26, 2023

In statistics, hypothesis testing is a critical tool. It allows us to make informed decisions about populations based on sample data. Whether you are a researcher trying to prove a scientific point, a marketer analysing A/B test results, or a manufacturer ensuring quality control, hypothesis testing plays a pivotal role. This guide aims to introduce you to the concept and walk you through real-world examples.

What is a Hypothesis and a Hypothesis Testing?

A hypothesis is considered a belief or assumption that has to be accepted, rejected, proved or disproved. In contrast, a research hypothesis is a research question for a researcher that has to be proven correct or incorrect through investigation.

What is Hypothesis Testing?

Hypothesis testing  is a scientific method used for making a decision and drawing conclusions by using a statistical approach. It is used to suggest new ideas by testing theories to know whether or not the sample data supports research. A research hypothesis is a predictive statement that has to be tested using scientific methods that join an independent variable to a dependent variable.  

Example: The academic performance of student A is better than student B

Characteristics of the Hypothesis to be Tested

A hypothesis should be:

• Clear and precise
• Capable of being tested
• Able to relate to a variable
• Stated in simple terms
• Consistent with known facts
• Limited in scope and specific
• Tested in a limited timeframe
• Explain the facts in detail

What is a Null Hypothesis and Alternative Hypothesis?

A  null hypothesis  is a hypothesis when there is no significant relationship between the dependent and the participants’ independent  variables . 

In simple words, it’s a hypothesis that has been put forth but hasn’t been proved as yet. A researcher aims to disprove the theory. The abbreviation “Ho” is used to denote a null hypothesis.

If you want to compare two methods and assume that both methods are equally good, this assumption is considered the null hypothesis.

Example: In an automobile trial, you feel that the new vehicle’s mileage is similar to the previous model of the car, on average. You can write it as: Ho: there is no difference between the mileage of both vehicles. If your findings don’t support your hypothesis and you get opposite results, this outcome will be considered an alternative hypothesis.

If you assume that one method is better than another method, then it’s considered an alternative hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis is the theory that a researcher seeks to prove and is typically denoted by H1 or HA.

If you support a null hypothesis, it means you’re not supporting the alternative hypothesis. Similarly, if you reject a null hypothesis, it means you are recommending the alternative hypothesis.

Example: In an automobile trial, you feel that the new vehicle’s mileage is better than the previous model of the vehicle. You can write it as; Ha: the two vehicles have different mileage. On average/ the fuel consumption of the new vehicle model is better than the previous model.

If a null hypothesis is rejected during the hypothesis test, even if it’s true, then it is considered as a type-I error. On the other hand, if you don’t dismiss a hypothesis, even if it’s false because you could not identify its falseness, it’s considered a type-II error.

Hire an Expert Researcher

Orders completed by our expert writers are

• Formally drafted in academic style
• 100% Plagiarism free & 100% Confidential
• Never resold
• Include unlimited free revisions
• Completed to match exact client requirements

How to Conduct Hypothesis Testing?

Here is a step-by-step guide on how to conduct hypothesis testing.

Step 1: State the Null and Alternative Hypothesis

Once you develop a research hypothesis, it’s important to state it is as a Null hypothesis (Ho) and an Alternative hypothesis (Ha) to test it statistically.

A null hypothesis is a preferred choice as it provides the opportunity to test the theory. In contrast, you can accept the alternative hypothesis when the null hypothesis has been rejected.

Example: You want to identify a relationship between obesity of men and women and the modern living style. You develop a hypothesis that women, on average, gain weight quickly compared to men. Then you write it as: Ho: Women, on average, don’t gain weight quickly compared to men. Ha: Women, on average, gain weight quickly compared to men.

Step 2: Data Collection

Hypothesis testing follows the statistical method, and statistics are all about data. It’s challenging to gather complete information about a specific population you want to study. You need to  gather the data  obtained through a large number of samples from a specific population. 

Example: Suppose you want to test the difference in the rate of obesity between men and women. You should include an equal number of men and women in your sample. Then investigate various aspects such as their lifestyle, eating patterns and profession, and any other variables that may influence average weight. You should also determine your study’s scope, whether it applies to a specific group of population or worldwide population. You can use available information from various places, countries, and regions.

Step 3: Select Appropriate Statistical Test

There are many  types of statistical tests , but we discuss the most two common types below, such as One-sided and two-sided tests.

Note: Your choice of the type of test depends on the purpose of your study 

One-sided Test

In the one-sided test, the values of rejecting a null hypothesis are located in one tail of the probability distribution. The set of values is less or higher than the critical value of the test. It is also called a one-tailed test of significance.

Example: If you want to test that all mangoes in a basket are ripe. You can write it as: Ho: All mangoes in the basket, on average, are ripe. If you find all ripe mangoes in the basket, the null hypothesis you developed will be true.

Two-sided Test

In the two-sided test, the values of rejecting a null hypothesis are located on both tails of the probability distribution. The set of values is less or higher than the first critical value of the test and higher than the second critical value test. It is also called a two-tailed test of significance. 

Example: Nothing can be explicitly said whether all mangoes are ripe in the basket. If you reject the null hypothesis (Ho: All mangoes in the basket, on average, are ripe), then it means all mangoes in the basket are not likely to be ripe. A few mangoes could be raw as well.

Get statistical analysis help at an affordable price

• An expert statistician will complete your work
• Rigorous quality checks
• Confidentiality and reliability
• Any statistical software of your choice
• Free Plagiarism Report

Step 4: Select the Level of Significance

When you reject a null hypothesis, even if it’s true during a statistical hypothesis, it is considered the  significance level . It is the probability of a type one error. The significance should be as minimum as possible to avoid the type-I error, which is considered severe and should be avoided. 

If the significance level is minimum, then it prevents the researchers from false claims. 

The significance level is denoted by  P,  and it has given the value of 0.05 (P=0.05)

If the P-Value is less than 0.05, then the difference will be significant. If the P-value is higher than 0.05, then the difference is non-significant.

Example: Suppose you apply a one-sided test to test whether women gain weight quickly compared to men. You get to know about the average weight between men and women and the factors promoting weight gain.

Step 5: Find out Whether the Null Hypothesis is Rejected or Supported

After conducting a statistical test, you should identify whether your null hypothesis is rejected or accepted based on the test results. It would help if you observed the P-value for this.

Example: If you find the P-value of your test is less than 0.5/5%, then you need to reject your null hypothesis (Ho: Women, on average, don’t gain weight quickly compared to men). On the other hand, if a null hypothesis is rejected, then it means the alternative hypothesis might be true (Ha: Women, on average, gain weight quickly compared to men. If you find your test’s P-value is above 0.5/5%, then it means your null hypothesis is true.

Step 6: Present the Outcomes of your Study

The final step is to present the  outcomes of your study . You need to ensure whether you have met the objectives of your research or not. 

In the discussion section and  conclusion , you can present your findings by using supporting evidence and conclude whether your null hypothesis was rejected or supported.

In the result section, you can summarise your study’s outcomes, including the average difference and P-value of the two groups.

If we talk about the findings, our study your results will be as follows:

Example: In the study of identifying whether women gain weight quickly compared to men, we found the P-value is less than 0.5. Hence, we can reject the null hypothesis (Ho: Women, on average, don’t gain weight quickly than men) and conclude that women may likely gain weight quickly than men.

Did you know in your academic paper you should not mention whether you have accepted or rejected the null hypothesis? 

Always remember that you either conclude to reject Ho in favor of Haor   do not reject Ho . It would help if you never rejected  Ha  or even  accept Ha .

Suppose your null hypothesis is rejected in the hypothesis testing. If you conclude  reject Ho in favor of Haor   do not reject Ho,  then it doesn’t mean that the null hypothesis is true. It only means that there is a lack of evidence against Ho in favour of Ha. If your null hypothesis is not true, then the alternative hypothesis is likely to be true.

Example: We found that the P-value is less than 0.5. Hence, we can conclude reject Ho in favour of Ha (Ho: Women, on average, don’t gain weight quickly than men) reject Ho in favour of Ha. However, rejected in favour of Ha means (Ha: women may likely to gain weight quickly than men)

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the 3 types of hypothesis test.

The 3 types of hypothesis tests are:

• One-Sample Test : Compare sample data to a known population value.
• Two-Sample Test : Compare means between two sample groups.
• ANOVA : Analyze variance among multiple groups to determine significant differences.

What is a hypothesis?

A hypothesis is a proposed explanation or prediction about a phenomenon, often based on observations. It serves as a starting point for research or experimentation, providing a testable statement that can either be supported or refuted through data and analysis. In essence, it’s an educated guess that drives scientific inquiry.

What are null hypothesis?

A null hypothesis (often denoted as H0) suggests that there is no effect or difference in a study or experiment. It represents a default position or status quo. Statistical tests evaluate data to determine if there’s enough evidence to reject this null hypothesis.

What is the probability value?

The probability value, or p-value, is a measure used in statistics to determine the significance of an observed effect. It indicates the probability of obtaining the observed results, or more extreme, if the null hypothesis were true. A small p-value (typically <0.05) suggests evidence against the null hypothesis, warranting its rejection.

What is p value?

The p-value is a fundamental concept in statistical hypothesis testing. It represents the probability of observing a test statistic as extreme, or more so, than the one calculated from sample data, assuming the null hypothesis is true. A low p-value suggests evidence against the null, possibly justifying its rejection.

What is a t test?

A t-test is a statistical test used to compare the means of two groups. It determines if observed differences between the groups are statistically significant or if they likely occurred by chance. Commonly applied in research, there are different t-tests, including independent, paired, and one-sample, tailored to various data scenarios.

When to reject null hypothesis?

Reject the null hypothesis when the test statistic falls into a predefined rejection region or when the p-value is less than the chosen significance level (commonly 0.05). This suggests that the observed data is unlikely under the null hypothesis, indicating evidence for the alternative hypothesis. Always consider the study’s context.

You May Also Like

A confounding variable can potentially affect both the suspected cause and the suspected effect. Here is all you need to know about accounting for confounding variables in research.

What are the different types of research you can use in your dissertation? Here are some guidelines to help you choose a research strategy that would make your research more credible.

You can transcribe an interview by converting a conversation into a written format including question-answer recording sessions between two or more people.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

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.36(50); 2021 Dec 27

Formulating Hypotheses for Different Study Designs

Durga prasanna misra.

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

Armen Yuri Gasparyan

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

Olena Zimba

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

Marlen Yessirkepov

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

Vikas Agarwal

George d. kitas.

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

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

Graphical Abstract

DEFINING WORKING AND STANDALONE SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

DO WE NEED HYPOTHESES FOR ALL STUDY DESIGNS?

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

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

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

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

STANDARDS OF WORKING AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES

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

Evidence-based data

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

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

Supported by pilot studies

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

Testable by ethical studies

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

Balance between scientific temper and controversy

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

DISTINGUISHING THE MOST INFLUENTIAL HYPOTHESES

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

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

LESSONS LEARNED FROM HYPOTHESES AMIDST THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

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

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

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

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

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

SUGGESTIONS ON GENERATING AND PUBLISHING HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

Author Contributions:

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

User Preferences

Content preview.

Arcu felis bibendum ut tristique et egestas quis:

• Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris
• Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate
• Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident

Keyboard Shortcuts

S.3 hypothesis testing.

In reviewing hypothesis tests, we start first with the general idea. Then, we keep returning to the basic procedures of hypothesis testing, each time adding a little more detail.

The general idea of hypothesis testing involves:

• Making an initial assumption.
• Collecting evidence (data).
• Based on the available evidence (data), deciding whether to reject or not reject the initial assumption.

Every hypothesis test — regardless of the population parameter involved — requires the above three steps.

Example S.3.1

Is normal body temperature really 98.6 degrees f section  .

Consider the population of many, many adults. A researcher hypothesized that the average adult body temperature is lower than the often-advertised 98.6 degrees F. That is, the researcher wants an answer to the question: "Is the average adult body temperature 98.6 degrees? Or is it lower?" To answer his research question, the researcher starts by assuming that the average adult body temperature was 98.6 degrees F.

Then, the researcher went out and tried to find evidence that refutes his initial assumption. In doing so, he selects a random sample of 130 adults. The average body temperature of the 130 sampled adults is 98.25 degrees.

Then, the researcher uses the data he collected to make a decision about his initial assumption. It is either likely or unlikely that the researcher would collect the evidence he did given his initial assumption that the average adult body temperature is 98.6 degrees:

• If it is likely , then the researcher does not reject his initial assumption that the average adult body temperature is 98.6 degrees. There is not enough evidence to do otherwise.
• either the researcher's initial assumption is correct and he experienced a very unusual event;
• or the researcher's initial assumption is incorrect.

In statistics, we generally don't make claims that require us to believe that a very unusual event happened. That is, in the practice of statistics, if the evidence (data) we collected is unlikely in light of the initial assumption, then we reject our initial assumption.

Example S.3.2

Criminal trial analogy section  .

One place where you can consistently see the general idea of hypothesis testing in action is in criminal trials held in the United States. Our criminal justice system assumes "the defendant is innocent until proven guilty." That is, our initial assumption is that the defendant is innocent.

In the practice of statistics, we make our initial assumption when we state our two competing hypotheses -- the null hypothesis ( H 0 ) and the alternative hypothesis ( H A ). Here, our hypotheses are:

• H 0 : Defendant is not guilty (innocent)
• H A : Defendant is guilty

In statistics, we always assume the null hypothesis is true . That is, the null hypothesis is always our initial assumption.

The prosecution team then collects evidence — such as finger prints, blood spots, hair samples, carpet fibers, shoe prints, ransom notes, and handwriting samples — with the hopes of finding "sufficient evidence" to make the assumption of innocence refutable.

In statistics, the data are the evidence.

The jury then makes a decision based on the available evidence:

• If the jury finds sufficient evidence — beyond a reasonable doubt — to make the assumption of innocence refutable, the jury rejects the null hypothesis and deems the defendant guilty. We behave as if the defendant is guilty.
• If there is insufficient evidence, then the jury does not reject the null hypothesis . We behave as if the defendant is innocent.

In statistics, we always make one of two decisions. We either "reject the null hypothesis" or we "fail to reject the null hypothesis."

Errors in Hypothesis Testing Section  

Did you notice the use of the phrase "behave as if" in the previous discussion? We "behave as if" the defendant is guilty; we do not "prove" that the defendant is guilty. And, we "behave as if" the defendant is innocent; we do not "prove" that the defendant is innocent.

This is a very important distinction! We make our decision based on evidence not on 100% guaranteed proof. Again:

• If we reject the null hypothesis, we do not prove that the alternative hypothesis is true.
• If we do not reject the null hypothesis, we do not prove that the null hypothesis is true.

We merely state that there is enough evidence to behave one way or the other. This is always true in statistics! Because of this, whatever the decision, there is always a chance that we made an error .

Let's review the two types of errors that can be made in criminal trials:

Table S.3.2 shows how this corresponds to the two types of errors in hypothesis testing.

Note that, in statistics, we call the two types of errors by two different  names -- one is called a "Type I error," and the other is called  a "Type II error." Here are the formal definitions of the two types of errors:

There is always a chance of making one of these errors. But, a good scientific study will minimize the chance of doing so!

Making the Decision Section  

Recall that it is either likely or unlikely that we would observe the evidence we did given our initial assumption. If it is likely , we do not reject the null hypothesis. If it is unlikely , then we reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis. Effectively, then, making the decision reduces to determining "likely" or "unlikely."

In statistics, there are two ways to determine whether the evidence is likely or unlikely given the initial assumption:

• We could take the " critical value approach " (favored in many of the older textbooks).
• Or, we could take the " P -value approach " (what is used most often in research, journal articles, and statistical software).

In the next two sections, we review the procedures behind each of these two approaches. To make our review concrete, let's imagine that μ is the average grade point average of all American students who major in mathematics. We first review the critical value approach for conducting each of the following three hypothesis tests about the population mean $\mu$:

In Practice

• We would want to conduct the first hypothesis test if we were interested in concluding that the average grade point average of the group is more than 3.
• We would want to conduct the second hypothesis test if we were interested in concluding that the average grade point average of the group is less than 3.
• And, we would want to conduct the third hypothesis test if we were only interested in concluding that the average grade point average of the group differs from 3 (without caring whether it is more or less than 3).

Upon completing the review of the critical value approach, we review the P -value approach for conducting each of the above three hypothesis tests about the population mean \(\mu\). The procedures that we review here for both approaches easily extend to hypothesis tests about any other population parameter.

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Choosing the Right Statistical Test | Types & Examples

Choosing the Right Statistical Test | Types & Examples

Published on January 28, 2020 by Rebecca Bevans . Revised on June 22, 2023.

Statistical tests are used in hypothesis testing . They can be used to:

• determine whether a predictor variable has a statistically significant relationship with an outcome variable.
• estimate the difference between two or more groups.

Statistical tests assume a null hypothesis of no relationship or no difference between groups. Then they determine whether the observed data fall outside of the range of values predicted by the null hypothesis.

If you already know what types of variables you’re dealing with, you can use the flowchart to choose the right statistical test for your data.

Statistical tests flowchart

Table of contents

What does a statistical test do, when to perform a statistical test, choosing a parametric test: regression, comparison, or correlation, choosing a nonparametric test, flowchart: choosing a statistical test, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about statistical tests.

Statistical tests work by calculating a test statistic – a number that describes how much the relationship between variables in your test differs from the null hypothesis of no relationship.

It then calculates a p value (probability value). The p -value estimates how likely it is that you would see the difference described by the test statistic if the null hypothesis of no relationship were true.

If the value of the test statistic is more extreme than the statistic calculated from the null hypothesis, then you can infer a statistically significant relationship between the predictor and outcome variables.

If the value of the test statistic is less extreme than the one calculated from the null hypothesis, then you can infer no statistically significant relationship between the predictor and outcome variables.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

You can perform statistical tests on data that have been collected in a statistically valid manner – either through an experiment , or through observations made using probability sampling methods .

For a statistical test to be valid , your sample size needs to be large enough to approximate the true distribution of the population being studied.

To determine which statistical test to use, you need to know:

• whether your data meets certain assumptions.
• the types of variables that you’re dealing with.

Statistical assumptions

Statistical tests make some common assumptions about the data they are testing:

• Independence of observations (a.k.a. no autocorrelation): The observations/variables you include in your test are not related (for example, multiple measurements of a single test subject are not independent, while measurements of multiple different test subjects are independent).
• Homogeneity of variance : the variance within each group being compared is similar among all groups. If one group has much more variation than others, it will limit the test’s effectiveness.
• Normality of data : the data follows a normal distribution (a.k.a. a bell curve). This assumption applies only to quantitative data .

If your data do not meet the assumptions of normality or homogeneity of variance, you may be able to perform a nonparametric statistical test , which allows you to make comparisons without any assumptions about the data distribution.

If your data do not meet the assumption of independence of observations, you may be able to use a test that accounts for structure in your data (repeated-measures tests or tests that include blocking variables).

Types of variables

The types of variables you have usually determine what type of statistical test you can use.

Quantitative variables represent amounts of things (e.g. the number of trees in a forest). Types of quantitative variables include:

• Continuous (aka ratio variables): represent measures and can usually be divided into units smaller than one (e.g. 0.75 grams).
• Discrete (aka integer variables): represent counts and usually can’t be divided into units smaller than one (e.g. 1 tree).

Categorical variables represent groupings of things (e.g. the different tree species in a forest). Types of categorical variables include:

• Ordinal : represent data with an order (e.g. rankings).
• Nominal : represent group names (e.g. brands or species names).
• Binary : represent data with a yes/no or 1/0 outcome (e.g. win or lose).

Choose the test that fits the types of predictor and outcome variables you have collected (if you are doing an experiment , these are the independent and dependent variables ). Consult the tables below to see which test best matches your variables.

Parametric tests usually have stricter requirements than nonparametric tests, and are able to make stronger inferences from the data. They can only be conducted with data that adheres to the common assumptions of statistical tests.

The most common types of parametric test include regression tests, comparison tests, and correlation tests.

Regression tests

Regression tests look for cause-and-effect relationships . They can be used to estimate the effect of one or more continuous variables on another variable.

Comparison tests

Comparison tests look for differences among group means . They can be used to test the effect of a categorical variable on the mean value of some other characteristic.

T-tests are used when comparing the means of precisely two groups (e.g., the average heights of men and women). ANOVA and MANOVA tests are used when comparing the means of more than two groups (e.g., the average heights of children, teenagers, and adults).

Correlation tests

Correlation tests check whether variables are related without hypothesizing a cause-and-effect relationship.

These can be used to test whether two variables you want to use in (for example) a multiple regression test are autocorrelated.

Non-parametric tests don’t make as many assumptions about the data, and are useful when one or more of the common statistical assumptions are violated. However, the inferences they make aren’t as strong as with parametric tests.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

This flowchart helps you choose among parametric tests. For nonparametric alternatives, check the table above.

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
• Null hypothesis

Methodology

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

Research bias

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

Statistical tests commonly assume that:

• the data are normally distributed
• the groups that are being compared have similar variance
• the data are independent

If your data does not meet these assumptions you might still be able to use a nonparametric statistical test , which have fewer requirements but also make weaker inferences.

A test statistic is a number calculated by a  statistical test . It describes how far your observed data is from the  null hypothesis  of no relationship between  variables or no difference among sample groups.

The test statistic tells you how different two or more groups are from the overall population mean , or how different a linear slope is from the slope predicted by a null hypothesis . Different test statistics are used in different statistical tests.

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

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

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

Quantitative variables are any variables where the data represent amounts (e.g. height, weight, or age).

Categorical variables are any variables where the data represent groups. This includes rankings (e.g. finishing places in a race), classifications (e.g. brands of cereal), and binary outcomes (e.g. coin flips).

You need to know what type of variables you are working with to choose the right statistical test for your data and interpret your results .

Discrete and continuous variables are two types of quantitative variables :

• Discrete variables represent counts (e.g. the number of objects in a collection).
• Continuous variables represent measurable amounts (e.g. water volume or weight).

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). Choosing the Right Statistical Test | Types & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved March 27, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/statistical-tests/

Is this article helpful?

Rebecca Bevans

Other students also liked, hypothesis testing | a step-by-step guide with easy examples, test statistics | definition, interpretation, and examples, normal distribution | examples, formulas, & uses, what is your plagiarism score.

• Comprehensive Learning Paths
• 150+ Hours of Videos
• Complete Access to Jupyter notebooks, Datasets, References.

Hypothesis Testing – A Deep Dive into Hypothesis Testing, The Backbone of Statistical Inference

• September 21, 2023

Explore the intricacies of hypothesis testing, a cornerstone of statistical analysis. Dive into methods, interpretations, and applications for making data-driven decisions.

In this Blog post we will learn:

• What is Hypothesis Testing?
• Steps in Hypothesis Testing 2.1. Set up Hypotheses: Null and Alternative 2.2. Choose a Significance Level (α) 2.3. Calculate a test statistic and P-Value 2.4. Make a Decision
• Example : Testing a new drug.
• Example in python

1. What is Hypothesis Testing?

In simple terms, hypothesis testing is a method used to make decisions or inferences about population parameters based on sample data. Imagine being handed a dice and asked if it’s biased. By rolling it a few times and analyzing the outcomes, you’d be engaging in the essence of hypothesis testing.

Think of hypothesis testing as the scientific method of the statistics world. Suppose you hear claims like “This new drug works wonders!” or “Our new website design boosts sales.” How do you know if these statements hold water? Enter hypothesis testing.

2. Steps in Hypothesis Testing

• Set up Hypotheses : Begin with a null hypothesis (H0) and an alternative hypothesis (Ha).
• Choose a Significance Level (α) : Typically 0.05, this is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when it’s actually true. Think of it as the chance of accusing an innocent person.
• Calculate Test statistic and P-Value : Gather evidence (data) and calculate a test statistic.
• p-value : This is the probability of observing the data, given that the null hypothesis is true. A small p-value (typically ≤ 0.05) suggests the data is inconsistent with the null hypothesis.
• Decision Rule : If the p-value is less than or equal to α, you reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative.

2.1. Set up Hypotheses: Null and Alternative

Before diving into testing, we must formulate hypotheses. The null hypothesis (H0) represents the default assumption, while the alternative hypothesis (H1) challenges it.

For instance, in drug testing, H0 : “The new drug is no better than the existing one,” H1 : “The new drug is superior .”

2.2. Choose a Significance Level (α)

When You collect and analyze data to test H0 and H1 hypotheses. Based on your analysis, you decide whether to reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative, or fail to reject / Accept the null hypothesis.

The significance level, often denoted by $α$, represents the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when it is actually true.

In other words, it’s the risk you’re willing to take of making a Type I error (false positive).

Type I Error (False Positive) :

• Symbolized by the Greek letter alpha (α).
• Occurs when you incorrectly reject a true null hypothesis . In other words, you conclude that there is an effect or difference when, in reality, there isn’t.
• The probability of making a Type I error is denoted by the significance level of a test. Commonly, tests are conducted at the 0.05 significance level , which means there’s a 5% chance of making a Type I error .
• Commonly used significance levels are 0.01, 0.05, and 0.10, but the choice depends on the context of the study and the level of risk one is willing to accept.

Example : If a drug is not effective (truth), but a clinical trial incorrectly concludes that it is effective (based on the sample data), then a Type I error has occurred.

Type II Error (False Negative) :

• Symbolized by the Greek letter beta (β).
• Occurs when you accept a false null hypothesis . This means you conclude there is no effect or difference when, in reality, there is.
• The probability of making a Type II error is denoted by β. The power of a test (1 – β) represents the probability of correctly rejecting a false null hypothesis.

Example : If a drug is effective (truth), but a clinical trial incorrectly concludes that it is not effective (based on the sample data), then a Type II error has occurred.

Balancing the Errors :

In practice, there’s a trade-off between Type I and Type II errors. Reducing the risk of one typically increases the risk of the other. For example, if you want to decrease the probability of a Type I error (by setting a lower significance level), you might increase the probability of a Type II error unless you compensate by collecting more data or making other adjustments.

It’s essential to understand the consequences of both types of errors in any given context. In some situations, a Type I error might be more severe, while in others, a Type II error might be of greater concern. This understanding guides researchers in designing their experiments and choosing appropriate significance levels.

2.3. Calculate a test statistic and P-Value

Test statistic : A test statistic is a single number that helps us understand how far our sample data is from what we’d expect under a null hypothesis (a basic assumption we’re trying to test against). Generally, the larger the test statistic, the more evidence we have against our null hypothesis. It helps us decide whether the differences we observe in our data are due to random chance or if there’s an actual effect.

P-value : The P-value tells us how likely we would get our observed results (or something more extreme) if the null hypothesis were true. It’s a value between 0 and 1. – A smaller P-value (typically below 0.05) means that the observation is rare under the null hypothesis, so we might reject the null hypothesis. – A larger P-value suggests that what we observed could easily happen by random chance, so we might not reject the null hypothesis.

2.4. Make a Decision

Relationship between $α$ and P-Value

When conducting a hypothesis test:

We then calculate the p-value from our sample data and the test statistic.

Finally, we compare the p-value to our chosen $α$:

• If $p−value≤α$: We reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis. The result is said to be statistically significant.
• If $p−value>α$: We fail to reject the null hypothesis. There isn’t enough statistical evidence to support the alternative hypothesis.

3. Example : Testing a new drug.

Imagine we are investigating whether a new drug is effective at treating headaches faster than drug B.

Setting Up the Experiment : You gather 100 people who suffer from headaches. Half of them (50 people) are given the new drug (let’s call this the ‘Drug Group’), and the other half are given a sugar pill, which doesn’t contain any medication.

• Set up Hypotheses : Before starting, you make a prediction:
• Null Hypothesis (H0): The new drug has no effect. Any difference in healing time between the two groups is just due to random chance.
• Alternative Hypothesis (H1): The new drug does have an effect. The difference in healing time between the two groups is significant and not just by chance.

Calculate Test statistic and P-Value : After the experiment, you analyze the data. The “test statistic” is a number that helps you understand the difference between the two groups in terms of standard units.

For instance, let’s say:

• The average healing time in the Drug Group is 2 hours.
• The average healing time in the Placebo Group is 3 hours.

The test statistic helps you understand how significant this 1-hour difference is. If the groups are large and the spread of healing times in each group is small, then this difference might be significant. But if there’s a huge variation in healing times, the 1-hour difference might not be so special.

Imagine the P-value as answering this question: “If the new drug had NO real effect, what’s the probability that I’d see a difference as extreme (or more extreme) as the one I found, just by random chance?”

For instance:

• P-value of 0.01 means there’s a 1% chance that the observed difference (or a more extreme difference) would occur if the drug had no effect. That’s pretty rare, so we might consider the drug effective.
• P-value of 0.5 means there’s a 50% chance you’d see this difference just by chance. That’s pretty high, so we might not be convinced the drug is doing much.
• If the P-value is less than ($α$) 0.05: the results are “statistically significant,” and they might reject the null hypothesis , believing the new drug has an effect.
• If the P-value is greater than ($α$) 0.05: the results are not statistically significant, and they don’t reject the null hypothesis , remaining unsure if the drug has a genuine effect.

4. Example in python

For simplicity, let’s say we’re using a t-test (common for comparing means). Let’s dive into Python:

Making a Decision : “The results are statistically significant! p-value < 0.05 , The drug seems to have an effect!” If not, we’d say, “Looks like the drug isn’t as miraculous as we thought.”

5. Conclusion

Hypothesis testing is an indispensable tool in data science, allowing us to make data-driven decisions with confidence. By understanding its principles, conducting tests properly, and considering real-world applications, you can harness the power of hypothesis testing to unlock valuable insights from your data.

More Articles

Correlation – connecting the dots, the role of correlation in data analysis, sampling and sampling distributions – a comprehensive guide on sampling and sampling distributions, law of large numbers – a deep dive into the world of statistics, central limit theorem – a deep dive into central limit theorem and its significance in statistics, skewness and kurtosis – peaks and tails, understanding data through skewness and kurtosis”, similar articles, complete introduction to linear regression in r, how to implement common statistical significance tests and find the p value, logistic regression – a complete tutorial with examples in r.

Subscribe to Machine Learning Plus for high value data science content

© Machinelearningplus. All rights reserved.

Machine Learning A-Z™: Hands-On Python & R In Data Science

Free sample videos:.

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 25 March 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.

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

1.4: The Scientific Method

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 36746

• Orange County Biotechnology Education Collaborative
• ASCCC Open Educational Resources Initiative

Learning Objectives

• Utilize the steps in the scientific method to design, collect and interpret scientific data.

Student Learning Outcomes:

Upon completion of this lab, students will be able to:

• Formulate a hypothesis based on an observation.
• Design their own experimental method including proper controls.
• Collect results and describe colony growth (morphology) present.
• Determine if data collected supports their hypothesis

INTRODUCTION

Microbes are all around us. In this lab, you will be introduced to this as well as to the scientific method. Throughout the semester, you will learn how to aseptically work with bacteria; meaning learning how to culture bacteria without contaminating yourself and keeping a pure sample of bacteria free from other unwanted bacteria. During this lab exercise, you are going to swab an area of your choice to see what bacteria and/or fungi are present there. You will also test the effect of some disinfectants on the bacterium Escherichia coli ( E. coli ) Using the scientific method, you will design an experiment, collect data, and interpret your results.

The scientific method is a generalized tool used to aid in asking and answering a scientific question by making observations and performing experiments. There are steps that are generally followed when conducting and designing an experiment. First, an initial observation is made. An observation can involve noting any event (a pattern, an action, a behavior, or a reaction). After making an observation, a question can be asked about the event. Once a question is asked, then research regarding what is already known relating to this question (finding background material) can be discovered to better understand the observation. This background information typically comes from publications in scientific literature, such as journal articles and reviews. Once the background information is understood, a hypothesis can be formed. This gathering of information and its application to a solution is an example of inductive reasoning. The hypothesis is then either supported or rejected depending on the analysis of the results of well-designed experiments. Each experiment needs dependent and independent variables . The value of the dependent variable is determined and is a function of the independent variable. In an ideal experimental setup, the independent variable is something over which we have some control and changes in some predetermined way, while changes in the dependent variable are observed and measured. A hypothesis must include both of these variables. A hypothesis can be generated by creating an “if-then” statement. For example, “If I treat cancer cells with drug x then they will die. “

Part I: Disk Diffusion Method to Evaluate Disinfectants

For this portion of the lab, you will be provided the protocol/instructions but you will choose the substances to test. You will develop and test your hypothesis.

• 1 culture of E. coli
• sterile swabs (1 swab needed per plate)
• sterile absorbent paper disks
• sterile water (negative control)
• 10% bleach (positive control)
• 30% hydrogen peroxide (positive control)
• 4 test disinfectant solutions
• 1 petri plate (containing sterile nutrient agar)
• Plan your experiment. In addition to the controls, which solutions would you like to test?
• Answer parts A, B, and C below to help with your planning.
• Dip the sterile swab into the E. coli solution then spread it over the entire surface of the NA plate by rubbing the swab over the entire surface. You want to coat the entire surface with the bacteria so do not leave spaces that have not been in contact with the swab. Be careful to only open the lid of the plate enough to work (like a clamshell). If you open the lid all the way, you risk contaminating the surface with unwanted bacteria/fungi from the environment.
• Dispose of the swab in the appropriate waste container.
• Using sterile forceps (tweezers) dedicated to the solution to be tested, dip sterile disks one at a time into the following solutions and place them onto the agar surface that has been inoculated with E. coli . Be sure not to allow the tweezers themselves to come in contact with the agar because that will cause them to become contaminated with bacteria.
• Include all answers to your questions in your lab notebook along with your procedure for testing the disinfectants.

Observation

• Based on your experience and observations, which solutions do you think will inhibit the growth (or kill) E. coli the most? Which solutions are you interested in testing?
• Based on your observations, write the hypothesis you wish to test.

Experimental Design

Work with your group to write a protocol for your experiment based on the questions below. Start with the instructions and insert the necessary details such that a person with no knowledge of your project would be able to read your protocol and fully understand what to do.

• Based on your hypothesis, which solutions will have the largest zone of inhibition around the disks?
• What will you include as your experimental controls? (Which solutions WILL or will NOT inhibit the bacteria)?
• How will you set up your experiment? (I recommend writing a map on your plate on the agar side where you will place the disks and then making a key to the map in your lab notebook).

Example Protocol

• On the bottom of your NA agar plate (the side with the agar, NOT the lid!!), label the plate using a permanent marker with your initials, “Biotech Lab”, the date, E. coli test, and where you are placing each disk.
• Take the sterile swab and dip it in the E. coli culture. ( Don’t place the lid for the E. coli on the desk or it will now be contaminated!) Place the labeled plate on the desk in front of you with the lid side of the plate up. With one hand, open the lid (only open it a little bit so that you can have access to the agar; think of a clam shell) and use the swab to spread the bacteria all over the plate. Make sure to move the swab around to cover the entire plate.
• Cover the plate with the lid and discard the swab in the appropriate waste container

• Place plate in a 37⁰C incubator, with the agar side up. (note: you can place it into the same 32⁰C incubator as the next experiment)
• The plate will grow in the incubator for 48 hours.
• When incubation is complete, measure the diameter of any zones of inhibition using a millimeter (mm) scale. Report data in the table below.
• Remove your plates from the incubator. DO NOT OPEN THE PLATES!
• Take a picture of your plates and include them in your lab notebook. Be sure to clearly label each portion of the plate.
• Make the following table in your notebook and record your data.
• Which solution did you use as a negative control ? Did this control provide the expected result?
• Based on your observations, which solution had the greatest effect on the E. coli ? Which has little or no effect?

Part II: Environmental Sampling

For this portion of the lab, you will develop and test your hypothesis as well as design the method to test it.

• 1 tube of sterile water
• sterile swabs (1 swab for each sample to be collected)
• Luria broth (LB) or nutrient agar (NA) plates (1 plate for each sample to be collected)
• Working with your group, determine your experimental design for this lab.
• Complete parts A, B, and C below to help with your planning.
• Include all answers to your questions in your lab notebook along with your procedure for collecting your samples.
• Based on your observations of the world around you what surfaces do you think are most “dirty” or “clean”? Which surfaces are you interested in testing?
• Based on your observations write the hypothesis you wish to test in your lab notebook.
• Based on your hypothesis, how many surfaces/samples will you test?
• What will you include as your experimental control?
• How will you perform your experiment? (I recommend dipping your sterile swab into the sterile water and then swabbing your sample).
• How long and in which pattern will you swab your samples? (roll, zigzag, etc.)
• How many plates will you need and how will you section them? (you can use a sharpie to label the bottom of the plate and draw sections if needed).

Based on these questions: Work with your group to write a protocol for your experiment. Include enough detail that a person with no knowledge of your project would be able to read your protocol and fully understand what to do. Below is a general protocol for this lab to help you get started.

• On the bottom of your NA agar plate (the side with the agar, NOT the lid!!), label the plate using a permanent marker with your initials, “Biotech Lab”, the date, and where you are choosing to swab.
• Take the sterile swab and dip it in the sterile water (don’t place the lid for the sterile water on the desk or it will now be contaminated!). Then touch the wet swab to whatever surface you would like to test in order to pick up the bacteria. Place the labeled plate on the desk in front of you with the lid side up. With one hand, open the lid (only open it a little bit so that you can have access to the agar; think of a clam shell) and use the swab to spread the bacteria all over the plate. Make sure to move the swab around to cover the entire plate.
• Cover the plate with the lid and discard the swab.
• Place plate in a 32⁰C incubator, with the agar side up. (Some organisms in the environment do not grow well at 37⁰C.)
• Make tables 2 and 3 in your notebook; record your data.

Use the image below to help you describe the morphology of the colonies present on your plates.

• Based on your experimental data, which surfaces had the most bacterial/fungal growth?
• Which surface had the most diverse number of bacteria/fungi?
• Based on your observations, what types of bacteria/fungus do you think were present on your plate?

Study Questions

• What are the steps of the scientific method?
• Be able to write a hypothesis based on a given observation.
• What is the purpose of an experimental control?
• What is the definition of an independent variable? A dependent variable?
• Why do we incubate plates upside down?
• Why do we label the agar side of the plate?
• What is the purpose of incubating the plates?
• What is the purpose of the LB or NA in the plate?
• Given a set of data, be able to formulate a conclusion based on the results given.

Chapter 1: How Science Works

Chapter 1 how science works.

• The Scientific Method
• Measurements
• Units and the Metric System
• Measurement Errors
• Mass, Length, and Time
• Observations and Uncertainty
• Precision and Significant Figures
• Errors and Statistics
• Scientific Notation
• Ways of Representing Data
• Mathematics

Testing a Hypothesis

• Case Study of Life on Mars
• Systems of Knowledge
• The Culture of Science
• Computer Simulations
• Modern Scientific Research
• The Scope of Astronomy
• Astronomy as a Science
• A Scale Model of Space
• A Scale Model of Time

Chapter 2 Early Astronomy

• The Night Sky
• Motions in the Sky
• Constellations and Seasons
• Cause of the Seasons
• The Magnitude System
• Angular Size and Linear Size
• Phases of the Moon
• Dividing Time
• Solar and Lunar Calendars
• History of Astronomy
• Ancient Observatories
• Counting and Measurement
• Greek Astronomy
• Aristotle and Geocentric Cosmology
• Aristarchus and Heliocentric Cosmology
• The Dark Ages
• Arab Astronomy
• Indian Astronomy
• Chinese Astronomy
• Mayan Astronomy

Chapter 3 The Copernican Revolution

• Ptolemy and the Geocentric Model
• The Renaissance
• Copernicus and the Heliocentric Model
• Tycho Brahe
• Johannes Kepler
• Elliptical Orbits
• Kepler's Laws
• Galileo Galilei
• The Trial of Galileo
• Isaac Newton
• Newton's Law of Gravity
• The Plurality of Worlds
• The Birth of Modern Science
• Layout of the Solar System
• Scale of the Solar System
• The Idea of Space Exploration
• History of Space Exploration
• Moon Landings
• International Space Station
• Manned versus Robotic Missions
• Commercial Space Flight
• Future of Space Exploration
• Living in Space
• Moon, Mars, and Beyond
• Societies in Space

Chapter 4 Matter and Energy in the Universe

• Matter and Energy
• Rutherford and Atomic Structure
• Early Greek Physics
• Dalton and Atoms
• The Periodic Table
• Structure of the Atom
• Heat and Temperature
• Potential and Kinetic Energy
• Conservation of Energy
• Velocity of Gas Particles
• States of Matter
• Thermodynamics
• Laws of Thermodynamics
• Heat Transfer
• Thermal Radiation
• Radiation from Planets and Stars
• Internal Heat in Planets and Stars
• Periodic Processes
• Random Processes

Chapter 5 The Earth-Moon System

• Earth and Moon
• Early Estimates of Earth's Age
• How the Earth Cooled
• Ages Using Radioactivity
• Radioactive Half-Life
• Ages of the Earth and Moon
• Geological Activity
• Internal Structure of the Earth and Moon
• Basic Rock Types
• Layers of the Earth and Moon
• Origin of Water on Earth
• The Evolving Earth
• Plate Tectonics
• Geological Processes
• Impact Craters
• The Geological Timescale
• Mass Extinctions
• Evolution and the Cosmic Environment
• Earth's Atmosphere and Oceans
• Weather Circulation
• Environmental Change on Earth
• The Earth-Moon System
• Geological History of the Moon
• Tidal Forces
• Effects of Tidal Forces
• Historical Studies of the Moon
• Lunar Surface
• Ice on the Moon
• Origin of the Moon
• Humans on the Moon

Chapter 6 The Terrestrial Planets

• Studying Other Planets
• The Planets
• The Terrestrial Planets
• Mercury's Orbit
• Mercury's Surface
• Volcanism on Venus
• Venus and the Greenhouse Effect
• Tectonics on Venus
• Exploring Venus
• Mars in Myth and Legend
• Early Studies of Mars
• Mars Close-Up
• Modern Views of Mars
• Missions to Mars
• Geology of Mars
• Water on Mars
• Polar Caps of Mars
• Climate Change on Mars
• Terraforming Mars
• Life on Mars
• The Moons of Mars
• Martian Meteorites
• Comparative Planetology
• Incidence of Craters
• Counting Craters
• Counting Statistics
• Internal Heat and Geological Activity
• Magnetic Fields of the Terrestrial Planets
• Mountains and Rifts
• Radar Studies of Planetary Surfaces
• Laser Ranging and Altimetry
• Gravity and Atmospheres
• Normal Atmospheric Composition
• The Significance of Oxygen

Chapter 7 The Giant Planets and Their Moons

• The Gas Giant Planets
• Atmospheres of the Gas Giant Planets
• Clouds and Weather on Gas Giant Planets
• Internal Structure of the Gas Giant Planets
• Thermal Radiation from Gas Giant Planets
• Life on Gas Giant Planets?
• Why Giant Planets are Giant
• Ring Systems of the Giant Planets
• Structure Within Ring Systems
• The Origin of Ring Particles
• The Roche Limit
• Resonance and Harmonics
• Tidal Forces in the Solar System
• Moons of Gas Giant Planets
• Geology of Large Moons
• The Voyager Missions
• Jupiter's Galilean Moons
• Jupiter's Ganymede
• Jupiter's Europa
• Jupiter's Callisto
• Jupiter's Io
• Volcanoes on Io
• Cassini Mission to Saturn
• Saturn's Titan
• Saturn's Enceladus
• Discovery of Uranus and Neptune
• Uranus' Miranda
• Neptune's Triton
• The Discovery of Pluto
• Pluto as a Dwarf Planet
• Dwarf Planets

Chapter 8 Interplanetary Bodies

• Interplanetary Bodies
• Early Observations of Comets
• Structure of the Comet Nucleus
• Comet Chemistry
• Oort Cloud and Kuiper Belt
• Kuiper Belt
• Comet Orbits
• Life Story of Comets
• The Largest Kuiper Belt Objects
• Meteors and Meteor Showers
• Gravitational Perturbations
• Surveys for Earth Crossing Asteroids
• Asteroid Shapes
• Composition of Asteroids
• Introduction to Meteorites
• Origin of Meteorites
• Types of Meteorites
• The Tunguska Event
• The Threat from Space
• Probability and Impacts
• Impact on Jupiter
• Interplanetary Opportunity

Chapter 9 Planet Formation and Exoplanets

• Formation of the Solar System
• Early History of the Solar System
• Conservation of Angular Momentum
• Angular Momentum in a Collapsing Cloud
• Helmholtz Contraction
• Safronov and Planet Formation
• Collapse of the Solar Nebula
• Why the Solar System Collapsed
• From Planetesimals to Planets
• Accretion and Solar System Bodies
• Differentiation
• Planetary Magnetic Fields
• The Origin of Satellites
• Solar System Debris and Formation
• Gradual Evolution and a Few Catastrophies
• Chaos and Determinism
• Extrasolar Planets
• Discoveries of Exoplanets
• Doppler Detection of Exoplanets
• Transit Detection of Exoplanets
• The Kepler Mission
• Direct Detection of Exoplanets
• Properties of Exoplanets
• Implications of Exoplanet Surveys
• Future Detection of Exoplanets

Chapter 10 Detecting Radiation from Space

• Observing the Universe
• Radiation and the Universe
• The Nature of Light
• The Electromagnetic Spectrum
• Properties of Waves
• Waves and Particles
• How Radiation Travels
• Properties of Electromagnetic Radiation
• The Doppler Effect
• Invisible Radiation
• Thermal Spectra
• The Quantum Theory
• The Uncertainty Principle
• Spectral Lines
• Emission Lines and Bands
• Absorption and Emission Spectra
• Kirchoff's Laws
• Astronomical Detection of Radiation
• The Telescope
• Optical Telescopes
• Optical Detectors
• Adaptive Optics
• Image Processing
• Digital Information
• Radio Telescopes
• Telescopes in Space
• Hubble Space Telescope
• Interferometry
• Collecting Area and Resolution
• Frontier Observatories

Chapter 11 Our Sun: The Nearest Star

• The Nearest Star
• Properties of the Sun
• Kelvin and the Sun's Age
• The Sun's Composition
• Energy From Atomic Nuclei
• Mass-Energy Conversion
• Examples of Mass-Energy Conversion
• Energy From Nuclear Fission
• Energy From Nuclear Fusion
• Nuclear Reactions in the Sun
• The Sun's Interior
• Energy Flow in the Sun
• Collisions and Opacity
• Solar Neutrinos
• Solar Oscillations
• The Sun's Atmosphere
• Solar Chromosphere and Corona
• The Solar Cycle
• The Solar Wind
• Effects of the Sun on the Earth
• Cosmic Energy Sources

Chapter 12 Properties of Stars

• Star Properties
• The Distance to Stars
• Apparent Brightness
• Absolute Brightness
• Measuring Star Distances
• Stellar Parallax
• Spectra of Stars
• Spectral Classification
• Temperature and Spectral Class
• Stellar Composition
• Stellar Motion
• Stellar Luminosity
• The Size of Stars
• Stefan-Boltzmann Law
• Stellar Mass
• Hydrostatic Equilibrium
• Stellar Classification
• The Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram
• Volume and Brightness Selected Samples
• Stars of Different Sizes
• Understanding the Main Sequence
• Stellar Structure
• Stellar Evolution

Chapter 13 Star Birth and Death

• Star Birth and Death
• Understanding Star Birth and Death
• Cosmic Abundance of Elements
• Star Formation
• Molecular Clouds
• Young Stars
• T Tauri Stars
• Mass Limits for Stars
• Brown Dwarfs
• Young Star Clusters
• Cauldron of the Elements
• Main Sequence Stars
• Nuclear Reactions in Main Sequence Stars
• Main Sequence Lifetimes
• Evolved Stars
• Cycles of Star Life and Death
• The Creation of Heavy Elements
• Horizontal Branch and Asymptotic Giant Branch Stars
• Variable Stars
• Magnetic Stars
• Stellar Mass Loss
• White Dwarfs
• Seeing the Death of a Star
• Supernova 1987A
• Neutron Stars and Pulsars
• Special Theory of Relativity
• General Theory of Relativity
• Black Holes
• Properties of Black Holes

Chapter 14 The Milky Way

• The Distribution of Stars in Space
• Stellar Companions
• Binary Star Systems
• Binary and Multiple Stars
• Mass Transfer in Binaries
• Binaries and Stellar Mass
• Nova and Supernova
• Exotic Binary Systems
• Gamma Ray Bursts
• How Multiple Stars Form
• Environments of Stars
• The Interstellar Medium
• Effects of Interstellar Material on Starlight
• Structure of the Interstellar Medium
• Dust Extinction and Reddening
• Groups of Stars
• Open Star Clusters
• Globular Star Clusters
• Distances to Groups of Stars
• Ages of Groups of Stars
• Layout of the Milky Way
• William Herschel
• Isotropy and Anisotropy
• Mapping the Milky Way

Chapter 15 Galaxies

• The Milky Way Galaxy
• Mapping the Galaxy Disk
• Spiral Structure in Galaxies
• Mass of the Milky Way
• Dark Matter in the Milky Way
• Galaxy Mass
• The Galactic Center
• Black Hole in the Galactic Center
• Stellar Populations
• Formation of the Milky Way
• The Shapley-Curtis Debate
• Edwin Hubble
• Distances to Galaxies
• Classifying Galaxies
• Spiral Galaxies
• Elliptical Galaxies
• Lenticular Galaxies
• Dwarf and Irregular Galaxies
• Overview of Galaxy Structures
• The Local Group
• Light Travel Time
• Galaxy Size and Luminosity
• Mass to Light Ratios
• Dark Matter in Galaxies
• Gravity of Many Bodies
• Galaxy Evolution
• Galaxy Interactions
• Galaxy Formation

Chapter 16 The Expanding Universe

• Galaxy Redshifts
• The Expanding Universe
• Cosmological Redshifts
• The Hubble Relation
• Relating Redshift and Distance
• Galaxy Distance Indicators
• Size and Age of the Universe
• The Hubble Constant
• Large Scale Structure
• Galaxy Clustering
• Clusters of Galaxies
• Overview of Large Scale Structure
• Dark Matter on the Largest Scales
• The Most Distant Galaxies
• Black Holes in Nearby Galaxies
• Active Galaxies
• Radio Galaxies
• The Discovery of Quasars
• Types of Gravitational Lensing
• Properties of Quasars
• The Quasar Power Source
• Quasars as Probes of the Universe
• Star Formation History of the Universe
• Expansion History of the Universe

Chapter 17 Cosmology

• Early Cosmologies
• Relativity and Cosmology
• The Big Bang Model
• The Cosmological Principle
• Universal Expansion
• Cosmic Nucleosynthesis
• Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation
• Discovery of the Microwave Background Radiation
• Measuring Space Curvature
• Cosmic Evolution
• Evolution of Structure
• Mean Cosmic Density
• Critical Density
• Dark Matter and Dark Energy
• Age of the Universe
• Precision Cosmology
• The Future of the Contents of the Universe
• Fate of the Universe
• Alternatives to the Big Bang Model
• Particles and Radiation
• The Very Early Universe
• Mass and Energy in the Early Universe
• Matter and Antimatter
• The Forces of Nature
• Fine-Tuning in Cosmology
• The Anthropic Principle in Cosmology
• String Theory and Cosmology
• The Multiverse
• The Limits of Knowledge

Chapter 18 Life On Earth

• Nature of Life
• Chemistry of Life
• Molecules of Life
• The Origin of Life on Earth
• Origin of Complex Molecules
• Miller-Urey Experiment
• Pre-RNA World
• From Molecules to Cells
• Extremophiles
• Thermophiles
• Psychrophiles
• Acidophiles
• Alkaliphiles
• Radiation Resistant Biology
• Importance of Water for Life
• Hydrothermal Systems
• Silicon Versus Carbon
• DNA and Heredity
• Life as Digital Information
• Synthetic Biology
• Life in a Computer
• Natural Selection
• Tree Of Life
• Evolution and Intelligence
• Culture and Technology
• The Gaia Hypothesis
• Life and the Cosmic Environment

Chapter 19 Life in the Universe

• Life in the Universe
• Astrobiology
• Life Beyond Earth
• Sites for Life
• Complex Molecules in Space
• Life in the Solar System
• Lowell and Canals on Mars
• Implications of Life on Mars
• Extreme Environments in the Solar System
• Rare Earth Hypothesis
• Are We Alone?
• Unidentified Flying Objects or UFOs
• The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence
• The Drake Equation
• The History of SETI
• Recent SETI Projects
• Recognizing a Message
• The Best Way to Communicate
• The Fermi Question
• The Anthropic Principle
• Where Are They?

Very few scientists create new theories or discover laws of nature. The day to day business of science consists of gathering data and consolidating existing knowledge. A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for a set of measurements. The mathematical formulation of the hypothesis is called a model. Scientists test hypotheses by acquiring data of more and more scope and accuracy.

Here is an important example of hypothesis-testing from the history of astronomy . The Copernican hypothesis was that the planets travel around the Sun on circular orbits. The planet velocity is the same at every point in a circular orbit . Therefore the velocity of Mars , for example, as seen from the Sun should not change. (The actual measurement is an angular velocity on the sky, which can be converted into a space velocity knowing the distance to Mars. An additional complication comes from the fact that the measurement is made not from the Sun but from the moving Earth.)

Kepler knew that the angular motion of Mars was not constant and he hypothesized that the orbit was elliptical. We can use Kepler's laws to calculate what this implies about the velocity of Mars in its orbit. Mars has an orbital eccentricity of 0.093. So if r is the mean distance from the Sun, the orbit varies from 1.093r to 0.907r. Elliptical orbits vary in speed with distance from the Sun according to ν ∝ √ r, so the velocity varies smoothly from √ 1.093 ν = 1.045 ν to √ 0.907 ν = 0.952 ν throughout the orbit. In other words, the orbit velocity varies from 4.5% above the mean to 4.5% below the mean; a total variation of 9%. So to detect the elliptical motion — and rule out the hypothesis of a circular orbit — requires measurement with at least this accuracy. Scientists can improve on the testing of a hypothesis either with more measurements, or more accurate measurements, or both.

Now consider an example of great current interest — the detection of extrasolar planets. The wobble motion of a star provides an opportunity to detect an unseen planet by its gravitational influence. Suppose we accurately observe the velocity of a star just like the Sun and look for the undulation in velocity caused by an orbiting planet. If the data show a clear variation then we can calculate the mass of the planet required to cause the variation. In this case, astronomers can confirm the hypothesis that a planet orbits the star and measure that it is a planet like Jupiter . The first extrasolar planet , discovered in 1995, was half the mass of Jupiter.

The example of detecting extrasolar planets can be used to look at hypothesis-testing in more detail. The data might be accurate enough to test the hypothesis of a Jupiter-sized planet. But it might not be possible to test a hypothesis when the effect being looked for is very small. The reflex motion of an Earth-sized planet is only 0.09 m/s. This Doppler motion would be a curve with 100 times less amplitude than the curve for Jupiter, completing a cycle each year. As you can imagine, a large amount of extremely accurate data would be required to test the hypothesis of an Earth-sized planet.

Sometimes astronomers suffer from insufficient data. Observations spanning a 5-year interval are insufficient to see an entire cycle of reflex motion of a planet like our Jupiter since its orbital period is 12 years. Once again, the hypothesis of a Jupiter-sized planet cannot be tested. The situation would be even worse if we were looking for a planet even further from its star. Uranus has an orbital period of 84 years, so nearly a century's worth of data would be needed to look for such a planet. A final possibility is that accurate data shows no significant variation from a constant velocity, at a level smaller than the prediction for a Jupiter-sized planet. This data allows us to reject the hypothesis of a planet with that mass.

The general description of hypothesis-testing has three features: the number of observations, the error in each observation, and the amount by which each observation deviates from the prediction of a hypothesis or model. Mathematically, we can say:

c 2 = Σ [(x data - x model ) 2 / σ (x) 2 ]

In this equation, take the square of the difference between the data and the model at every point, divide it by the square of the error in the observation, and sum this quantity over all data points. (A sum over quantities is represented in mathematics by the Greek letter capital sigma, Σ.) Essentially, this is a calculation of the amount by which the data deviates from the model. The quantity x could be any measurable quantity: light intensity , velocity, magnetic field strength, and so on. A good model closely represents the data and has a low value of c 2 . A bad model poorly represents the data and has a high value of c 2 . This method of testing a model or a hypothesis is at the heart of what scientists do.

What Is a Hypothesis? (Science)

If...,Then...

Angela Lumsden/Getty Images

• Scientific Method
• Chemical Laws
• Periodic Table
• Projects & Experiments
• Biochemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Medical Chemistry
• Chemistry In Everyday Life
• Famous Chemists
• Activities for Kids
• Abbreviations & Acronyms
• Weather & Climate
• Ph.D., Biomedical Sciences, University of Tennessee at Knoxville
• B.A., Physics and Mathematics, Hastings College

A hypothesis (plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for an observation. The definition depends on the subject.

In science, a hypothesis is part of the scientific method. It is a prediction or explanation that is tested by an experiment. Observations and experiments may disprove a scientific hypothesis, but can never entirely prove one.

In the study of logic, a hypothesis is an if-then proposition, typically written in the form, "If X , then Y ."

In common usage, a hypothesis is simply a proposed explanation or prediction, which may or may not be tested.

Writing a Hypothesis

Most scientific hypotheses are proposed in the if-then format because it's easy to design an experiment to see whether or not a cause and effect relationship exists between the independent variable and the dependent variable . The hypothesis is written as a prediction of the outcome of the experiment.

• Null Hypothesis and Alternative Hypothesis

Statistically, it's easier to show there is no relationship between two variables than to support their connection. So, scientists often propose the null hypothesis . The null hypothesis assumes changing the independent variable will have no effect on the dependent variable.

In contrast, the alternative hypothesis suggests changing the independent variable will have an effect on the dependent variable. Designing an experiment to test this hypothesis can be trickier because there are many ways to state an alternative hypothesis.

For example, consider a possible relationship between getting a good night's sleep and getting good grades. The null hypothesis might be stated: "The number of hours of sleep students get is unrelated to their grades" or "There is no correlation between hours of sleep and grades."

An experiment to test this hypothesis might involve collecting data, recording average hours of sleep for each student and grades. If a student who gets eight hours of sleep generally does better than students who get four hours of sleep or 10 hours of sleep, the hypothesis might be rejected.

But the alternative hypothesis is harder to propose and test. The most general statement would be: "The amount of sleep students get affects their grades." The hypothesis might also be stated as "If you get more sleep, your grades will improve" or "Students who get nine hours of sleep have better grades than those who get more or less sleep."

In an experiment, you can collect the same data, but the statistical analysis is less likely to give you a high confidence limit.

Usually, a scientist starts out with the null hypothesis. From there, it may be possible to propose and test an alternative hypothesis, to narrow down the relationship between the variables.

Example of a Hypothesis

Examples of a hypothesis include:

• If you drop a rock and a feather, (then) they will fall at the same rate.
• Plants need sunlight in order to live. (if sunlight, then life)
• Eating sugar gives you energy. (if sugar, then energy)
• White, Jay D.  Research in Public Administration . Conn., 1998.
• Schick, Theodore, and Lewis Vaughn.  How to Think about Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age . McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2002.
• Null Hypothesis Definition and Examples
• Definition of a Hypothesis
• What Are the Elements of a Good Hypothesis?
• Six Steps of the Scientific Method
• What Are Examples of a Hypothesis?
• Understanding Simple vs Controlled Experiments
• Scientific Method Flow Chart
• Scientific Method Vocabulary Terms
• What Is a Testable Hypothesis?
• Null Hypothesis Examples
• What 'Fail to Reject' Means in a Hypothesis Test
• How To Design a Science Fair Experiment
• What Is an Experiment? Definition and Design
• Hypothesis Test for the Difference of Two Population Proportions
• How to Conduct a Hypothesis Test

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.

• Science Projects
• Project Guides
• STEM Activities
• Lesson Plans
• Video Lessons

Writing a Hypothesis for Your Science Fair Project

What is a hypothesis.

Once a scientist has a scientific question she is interested in, the scientist reads up to find out what is already known on the topic. Then she uses that information to form a tentative answer to her scientific question. Sometimes people refer to the tentative answer as "an educated guess." Keep in mind, though, that the hypothesis also has to be testable since the next step is to do an experiment to determine whether or not the hypothesis is right!

A hypothesis leads to one or more predictions that can be tested by experimenting.

Predictions often take the shape of "If ____then ____" statements, but do not have to. Predictions should include both an independent variable (the factor you change in an experiment) and a dependent variable (the factor you observe or measure in an experiment). A single hypothesis can lead to multiple predictions, but generally, one or two predictions is enough to tackle for a science fair project.

Examples of Hypotheses and Predictions

What if my hypothesis is wrong.

What happens if, at the end of your science project, you look at the data you have collected and you realize it does not support your hypothesis? First, do not panic! The point of a science project is not to prove your hypothesis right. The point is to understand more about how the natural world works. Or, as it is sometimes put, to find out the scientific truth. When scientists do an experiment, they very often have data that shows their starting hypothesis was wrong. Why? Well, the natural world is complex—it takes a lot of experimenting to figure out how it works—and the more explanations you test, the closer you get to figuring out the truth. For scientists, disproving a hypothesis still means they gained important information, and they can use that information to make their next hypothesis even better. In a science fair setting, judges can be just as impressed by projects that start out with a faulty hypothesis; what matters more is whether you understood your science fair project, had a well-controlled experiment, and have ideas about what you would do next to improve your project if you had more time. You can read more about a science fair judge's view on disproving your hypothesis at Learn More About the Scientific Method .

It is worth noting, scientists never talk about their hypothesis being "right" or "wrong." Instead, they say that their data "supports" or "does not support" their hypothesis. This goes back to the point that nature is complex—so complex that it takes more than a single experiment to figure it all out because a single experiment could give you misleading data. For example, let us say that you hypothesize that earthworms do not exist in places that have very cold winters because it is too cold for them to survive. You then predict that you will find earthworms in the dirt in Florida, which has warm winters, but not Alaska, which has cold winters. When you go and dig a 3-foot by 3-foot-wide and 1-foot-deep hole in the dirt in those two states, you discover Floridian earthworms, but not Alaskan ones. So, was your hypothesis right? Well, your data "supported" your hypothesis, but your experiment did not cover that much ground. Can you really be sure there are no earthworms in Alaska? No. Which is why scientists only support (or not) their hypothesis with data, rather than proving them. And for the curious, yes there are earthworms in Alaska .

What Makes a Good Hypothesis?

Assign these with Google Classroom:

• Hypothesis Quiz
• My Science Project Hypothesis (Student Worksheet)

Explore Our Science Videos

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

How to Write a Great Hypothesis

Hypothesis Format, Examples, and Tips

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

Amy Morin, LCSW, is a psychotherapist and international bestselling author. Her books, including "13 Things Mentally Strong People Don't Do," have been translated into more than 40 languages. Her TEDx talk,  "The Secret of Becoming Mentally Strong," is one of the most viewed talks of all time.

Verywell / Alex Dos Diaz

• The Scientific Method

Hypothesis Format

Falsifiability of a hypothesis, operational definitions, types of hypotheses, hypotheses examples.

• Collecting Data

Frequently Asked Questions

A hypothesis is a tentative statement about the relationship between two or more  variables. It is a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in a study.

One hypothesis example would be a study designed to look at the relationship between sleep deprivation and test performance might have a hypothesis that states: "This study is designed to assess the hypothesis that sleep-deprived people will perform worse on a test than individuals who are not sleep-deprived."

This article explores how a hypothesis is used in psychology research, how to write a good hypothesis, and the different types of hypotheses you might use.

The Hypothesis in the Scientific Method

In the scientific method , whether it involves research in psychology, biology, or some other area, a hypothesis represents what the researchers think will happen in an experiment. The scientific method involves the following steps:

• Forming a question
• Performing background research
• Creating a hypothesis
• Designing an experiment
• Collecting data
• Analyzing the results
• Drawing conclusions
• Communicating the results

The hypothesis is a prediction, but it involves more than a guess. Most of the time, the hypothesis begins with a question which is then explored through background research. It is only at this point that researchers begin to develop a testable hypothesis. Unless you are creating an exploratory study, your hypothesis should always explain what you  expect  to happen.

In a study exploring the effects of a particular drug, the hypothesis might be that researchers expect the drug to have some type of effect on the symptoms of a specific illness. In psychology, the hypothesis might focus on how a certain aspect of the environment might influence a particular behavior.

Remember, a hypothesis does not have to be correct. While the hypothesis predicts what the researchers expect to see, the goal of the research is to determine whether this guess is right or wrong. When conducting an experiment, researchers might explore a number of factors to determine which ones might contribute to the ultimate outcome.

In many cases, researchers may find that the results of an experiment  do not  support the original hypothesis. When writing up these results, the researchers might suggest other options that should be explored in future studies.

In many cases, researchers might draw a hypothesis from a specific theory or build on previous research. For example, prior research has shown that stress can impact the immune system. So a researcher might hypothesize: "People with high-stress levels will be more likely to contract a common cold after being exposed to the virus than people who have low-stress levels."

In other instances, researchers might look at commonly held beliefs or folk wisdom. "Birds of a feather flock together" is one example of folk wisdom that a psychologist might try to investigate. The researcher might pose a specific hypothesis that "People tend to select romantic partners who are similar to them in interests and educational level."

Elements of a Good Hypothesis

So how do you write a good hypothesis? When trying to come up with a hypothesis for your research or experiments, ask yourself the following questions:

• Is your hypothesis based on your research on a topic?
• Can your hypothesis be tested?
• Does your hypothesis include independent and dependent variables?

Before you come up with a specific hypothesis, spend some time doing background research. Once you have completed a literature review, start thinking about potential questions you still have. Pay attention to the discussion section in the  journal articles you read . Many authors will suggest questions that still need to be explored.

To form a hypothesis, you should take these steps:

• Collect as many observations about a topic or problem as you can.
• Evaluate these observations and look for possible causes of the problem.
• Create a list of possible explanations that you might want to explore.
• After you have developed some possible hypotheses, think of ways that you could confirm or disprove each hypothesis through experimentation. This is known as falsifiability.

In the scientific method ,  falsifiability is an important part of any valid hypothesis.   In order to test a claim scientifically, it must be possible that the claim could be proven false.

Students sometimes confuse the idea of falsifiability with the idea that it means that something is false, which is not the case. What falsifiability means is that  if  something was false, then it is possible to demonstrate that it is false.

One of the hallmarks of pseudoscience is that it makes claims that cannot be refuted or proven false.

A variable is a factor or element that can be changed and manipulated in ways that are observable and measurable. However, the researcher must also define how the variable will be manipulated and measured in the study.

For example, a researcher might operationally define the variable " test anxiety " as the results of a self-report measure of anxiety experienced during an exam. A "study habits" variable might be defined by the amount of studying that actually occurs as measured by time.

These precise descriptions are important because many things can be measured in a number of different ways. One of the basic principles of any type of scientific research is that the results must be replicable.   By clearly detailing the specifics of how the variables were measured and manipulated, other researchers can better understand the results and repeat the study if needed.

Some variables are more difficult than others to define. How would you operationally define a variable such as aggression ? For obvious ethical reasons, researchers cannot create a situation in which a person behaves aggressively toward others.

In order to measure this variable, the researcher must devise a measurement that assesses aggressive behavior without harming other people. In this situation, the researcher might utilize a simulated task to measure aggressiveness.

Hypothesis Checklist

• Does your hypothesis focus on something that you can actually test?
• Does your hypothesis include both an independent and dependent variable?
• Can you manipulate the variables?
• Can your hypothesis be tested without violating ethical standards?

The hypothesis you use will depend on what you are investigating and hoping to find. Some of the main types of hypotheses that you might use include:

• Simple hypothesis : This type of hypothesis suggests that there is a relationship between one independent variable and one dependent variable.
• Complex hypothesis : This type of hypothesis suggests a relationship between three or more variables, such as two independent variables and a dependent variable.
• Null hypothesis : This hypothesis suggests no relationship exists between two or more variables.
• Alternative hypothesis : This hypothesis states the opposite of the null hypothesis.
• Statistical hypothesis : This hypothesis uses statistical analysis to evaluate a representative sample of the population and then generalizes the findings to the larger group.
• Logical hypothesis : This hypothesis assumes a relationship between variables without collecting data or evidence.

A hypothesis often follows a basic format of "If {this happens} then {this will happen}." One way to structure your hypothesis is to describe what will happen to the  dependent variable  if you change the  independent variable .

The basic format might be: "If {these changes are made to a certain independent variable}, then we will observe {a change in a specific dependent variable}."

A few examples of simple hypotheses:

• "Students who eat breakfast will perform better on a math exam than students who do not eat breakfast."
• Complex hypothesis: "Students who experience test anxiety before an English exam will get lower scores than students who do not experience test anxiety."​
• "Motorists who talk on the phone while driving will be more likely to make errors on a driving course than those who do not talk on the phone."

Examples of a complex hypothesis include:

• "People with high-sugar diets and sedentary activity levels are more likely to develop depression."
• "Younger people who are regularly exposed to green, outdoor areas have better subjective well-being than older adults who have limited exposure to green spaces."

Examples of a null hypothesis include:

• "Children who receive a new reading intervention will have scores different than students who do not receive the intervention."
• "There will be no difference in scores on a memory recall task between children and adults."

Examples of an alternative hypothesis:

• "Children who receive a new reading intervention will perform better than students who did not receive the intervention."
• "Adults will perform better on a memory task than children." 

Collecting Data on Your Hypothesis

Once a researcher has formed a testable hypothesis, the next step is to select a research design and start collecting data. The research method depends largely on exactly what they are studying. There are two basic types of research methods: descriptive research and experimental research.

Descriptive Research Methods

Descriptive research such as  case studies ,  naturalistic observations , and surveys are often used when it would be impossible or difficult to  conduct an experiment . These methods are best used to describe different aspects of a behavior or psychological phenomenon.

Once a researcher has collected data using descriptive methods, a correlational study can then be used to look at how the variables are related. This type of research method might be used to investigate a hypothesis that is difficult to test experimentally.

Experimental Research Methods

Experimental methods  are used to demonstrate causal relationships between variables. In an experiment, the researcher systematically manipulates a variable of interest (known as the independent variable) and measures the effect on another variable (known as the dependent variable).

Unlike correlational studies, which can only be used to determine if there is a relationship between two variables, experimental methods can be used to determine the actual nature of the relationship—whether changes in one variable actually  cause  another to change.

A Word From Verywell

The hypothesis is a critical part of any scientific exploration. It represents what researchers expect to find in a study or experiment. In situations where the hypothesis is unsupported by the research, the research still has value. Such research helps us better understand how different aspects of the natural world relate to one another. It also helps us develop new hypotheses that can then be tested in the future.

Some examples of how to write a hypothesis include:

• "Staying up late will lead to worse test performance the next day."
• "People who consume one apple each day will visit the doctor fewer times each year."
• "Breaking study sessions up into three 20-minute sessions will lead to better test results than a single 60-minute study session."

The four parts of a hypothesis are:

• The research question
• The independent variable (IV)
• The dependent variable (DV)
• The proposed relationship between the IV and DV

Castillo M. The scientific method: a need for something better? . AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34(9):1669-71. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3401

Nevid J. Psychology: Concepts and Applications. Wadworth, 2013.

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

• EXPLORE Random Article

How to Test a Hypothesis

Last Updated: July 4, 2023 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Meredith Juncker, PhD . Meredith Juncker is a PhD candidate in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center. Her studies are focused on proteins and neurodegenerative diseases. There are 8 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 40,473 times.

Testing a hypothesis is an important part of the scientific method. It allows you to evaluate the validity of an educated guess. In a typical process, you’ll form a hypothesis based on evidence that you’ve gathered, and then test that hypothesis through experiments. As you gather more and more data, you’ll be able to see if your original hypothesis was correct. If there were flaws in your first guess, you can revise your hypothesis to better match what you’ve learned from your data.

Asking a Question and Researching

• For example, a question could be something like, “Which brand of stain remover will remove stains from fabrics most effectively?” [2] X Research source

• For the stain-remover experiment, you could dirty 4 types of fabric (e.g. cotton, linen, wool, polyester) each with 4 different types of stains (e.g. red wine, grass, mud and dirt, grease), and then test the top four or five brands of stain remover (e.g. Mr. Clean, Tide, Shout, Clorox) to see which removes the largest number of stains.

• In the case of the stain-remover experiment, you’d need to purchase a bottle of each of the major stain-remover brands and dirty a variety of fabrics with a variety of stains.
• Then, test out each type of detergent on each of the stained fabrics. (If you live at your parents’ house, you’ll need to get permission to use the laundry room for most of a day.)

Making and Challenging Your Hypothesis

• For instance, if you’ve run some loads of laundry (maybe testing which brand of stain remover works best on removing different stains from linen), you can use your results to take a stab at a hypothesis.
• A good working hypothesis would look like: “If fabrics are stained with common household items, Tide stain remover will remove the stains most effectively.”

• In our example, since you only tested 1 type of fabric (linen), you’ll need to repeat the laundry test with the other 3 fabrics (cotton, wool, polyester) and note which stain remover most effectively eliminates the stains.

• While it can be tempting to only accept data that supports your hypothesis, it’s not scientific or ethical.
• You must accept all the data and watch for whatever patterns appear, even if it proves your hypothesis to be likely false.
• Note that significant results don’t mean your hypothesis is proven, but rather that based on the data you collected, the differences you observed are likely not due to chance.

Revising Your Hypothesis

• For example, if you began the experiment thinking that Tide would have the most effective stain remover, but you’ve noticed that Tide does a poor job of removing stains from red wine and mud, you likely need to change your working assumptions.

• So, if Tide turns out to be ineffective at removing certain types of stains, your early working hypothesis will have been incorrect.

• A final, tested hypothesis would look like: “Shout is the most effective stain remover for removing a variety of household stains from a variety of common fabrics.”

Expert Q&A

• Deductive (or “top-down”) reasoning won’t help you much in testing out a scientific hypothesis. Your hypothesis needs to be grounded in the tests you’ve run and the data that you’ve gathered. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0
• Depending on the type of hypothesis you’re testing, you may also need a control group. For example, if you’re testing how effective a drug is, you need to have a group on a placebo. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0
• Remember that a null hypothesis (when the control and tested variable are the same) is different from an alternative hypothesis (when the control and tested variable are different). Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://grammar.yourdictionary.com/for-students-and-parents/how-create-hypothesis.html
• ↑ https://www.education.com/science-fair/article/best-way-stains-out-of-clothes/
• ↑ https://www.grammarly.com/blog/how-to-write-a-hypothesis/
• ↑ https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-method
• ↑ https://online.stat.psu.edu/stat502_fa21/lesson/1/1.1
• ↑ https://pressbooks.pub/scientificinquiryinsocialwork/chapter/6-3-inductive-and-deductive-reasoning/
• ↑ https://online.stat.psu.edu/stat100/lesson/10/10.1
• ↑ https://www.khanacademy.org/science/biology/intro-to-biology/science-of-biology/a/the-science-of-biology

About this article

If you need to test a hypothesis, first come up with a question you’d like to answer, then develop an experiment to answer your question. As you set up your experiment, create a statement about what you think is happening. This is your hypothesis. As you perform the test, compare your data to your hypothesis. By the end of the experiment, you should be able to conclude whether your hypothesis was true or not. Read on to learn more from our Science co-author about how to set up an experiment! Did this summary help you? Yes No

Did this article help you?

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