what is research hypothesis with example

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

The Craft of Writing a Strong Hypothesis

Table of Contents

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

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

What is a Hypothesis?

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

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

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

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

Different Types of Hypotheses‌

Types of hypotheses

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

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

1. Null hypothesis

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

2. Alternative hypothesis

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

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

3. Simple hypothesis

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

4. Complex hypothesis

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

5. Associative and casual hypothesis

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

6. Empirical hypothesis

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

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

7. Statistical hypothesis

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

Characteristics of a Good Hypothesis

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

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

Separating a Hypothesis from a Prediction

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

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

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

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

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

Finally, How to Write a Hypothesis

Quick tips on writing a hypothesis

1.  Be clear about your research question

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

2. Carry out a recce

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

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

3. Create a 3-dimensional hypothesis

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

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

4. Write the first draft

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

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

5. Proof your hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

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

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. what is the definition of hypothesis.

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

2. What is an example of hypothesis?

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

3. What is an example of null hypothesis?

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

4. What are the types of research?

• Fundamental research

• Applied research

• Qualitative research

• Quantitative research

• Mixed research

• Exploratory research

• Longitudinal research

• Cross-sectional research

• Field research

• Laboratory research

• Fixed research

• Flexible research

• Action research

• Policy research

• Classification research

• Comparative research

• Causal research

• Inductive research

• Deductive research

5. How to write a hypothesis?

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

• Avoid wordiness by keeping it simple and brief.

• Your hypothesis should contain observable and testable outcomes.

• Your hypothesis should be relevant to the research question.

6. What are the 2 types of hypothesis?

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

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

7. Difference between research question and research hypothesis?

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

8. What is plural for hypothesis?

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

9. What is the red queen hypothesis?

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

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

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

11. When to reject null hypothesis?

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

You might also like

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

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

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

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 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."

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 2 April 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/hypothesis-writing/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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

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

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

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

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

Research Hypothesis 101

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

What is a hypothesis?

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

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

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

Hypothesis: sleep impacts academic performance.

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

But that’s not good enough…

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

What is a research hypothesis?

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

Let’s take a look at these more closely.

Need a helping hand?

Hypothesis Essential #1: Specificity & Clarity

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

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

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

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

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

Hypothesis Essential #2: Testability (Provability)

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

For example, consider the hypothesis we mentioned earlier:

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

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

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

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

Defining A Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

What about the null hypothesis?

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

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

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

And there you have it – hypotheses in a nutshell. 

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

Psst… there’s more (for free)

This post is part of our dissertation mini-course, which covers everything you need to get started with your dissertation, thesis or research project. 

You Might Also Like:

16 Comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

could you please elaborate it more

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

This is very helpful

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

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

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

this is very important note help me much more

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

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

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

• Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

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

What is a Hypothesis – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Definition:

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

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

Types of Hypothesis

Types of Hypothesis are as follows:

Research Hypothesis

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

Null Hypothesis

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

Alternative Hypothesis

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

Directional Hypothesis

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

Non-directional Hypothesis

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

Statistical Hypothesis

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

Composite Hypothesis

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

Empirical Hypothesis

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

Simple Hypothesis

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

Complex Hypothesis

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

Applications of Hypothesis

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

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

How to write a Hypothesis

Here are the steps to follow when writing a hypothesis:

Identify the Research Question

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

Conduct a Literature Review

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

Determine the Variables

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

Formulate the Hypothesis

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

Write the Null Hypothesis

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

Refine the Hypothesis

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

Examples of Hypothesis

Here are a few examples of hypotheses in different fields:

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

Purpose of Hypothesis

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

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

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

When to use Hypothesis

Here are some common situations in which hypotheses are used:

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

Characteristics of Hypothesis

Here are some common characteristics of a hypothesis:

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

Advantages of Hypothesis

Hypotheses have several advantages in scientific research and experimentation:

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

Limitations of Hypothesis

Some Limitations of the Hypothesis are as follows:

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

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

How to Write a Research Hypothesis

• Research Process
• Peer Review

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

Updated on April 27, 2022

What is a research hypothesis?

General hypothesis.

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

Research Hypothesis

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

What makes an effective research hypothesis?

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

Research hypothesis checklist

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

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

How to create an effective research hypothesis

Pose it as a question first.

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

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

Do the preliminary research

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

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

Write a draft hypothesis

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

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

Make your working draft perfect

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

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

Write a null hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

Characteristics that make a hypothesis weak include:

• Unclear variables
• Unoriginality
• Too general
• Too specific

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

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

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

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

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

Types of research hypotheses

There can be overlap in these types of hypotheses.

Simple hypothesis

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

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

Complex hypothesis

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

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

Directional hypothesis

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

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

Non-directional hypothesis

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

Associative hypothesis

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

Alternative hypothesis

An alternative hypothesis states that the variables have a relationship.

• The opposite of a null hypothesis

Example: An apple a day keeps the doctor away.

Null hypothesis

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

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

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

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

Logical hypothesis

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

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

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

Empirical hypothesis

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

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

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

Statistical hypothesis

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

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

Causal hypothesis

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

Example: Using tobacco products causes cancer.

Final thoughts

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

Jonny Rhein, BA

See our "Privacy Policy"

• Affiliate Program

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

How to Write a Research Hypothesis: Good & Bad Examples

What is a research hypothesis?

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

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

What is the difference between a hypothesis and a prediction?

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

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

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

Types of Research Hypotheses

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

Alternative Hypothesis

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

Null Hypothesis

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

Directional Hypothesis

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

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

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

Your null hypothesis would then be that

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

Nondirectional Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

How to Write a Hypothesis for a Research Paper

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

Writing a Hypothesis Step:1

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

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

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

Writing a Hypothesis Step 2:

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

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

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

Writing a Hypothesis Step 3:

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

Examples of a Good and Bad Hypothesis

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

Good Hypothesis Examples

Bad hypothesis examples, tips for writing a research hypothesis.

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

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

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

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

Perfect Your Manuscript With Professional Editing

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

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

Research Hypothesis In Psychology: Types, & Examples

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

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

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

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

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

On This Page:

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

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

Some key points about hypotheses:

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

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

Types of Research Hypotheses

Alternative hypothesis.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Null Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

Nondirectional Hypothesis

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

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

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

Directional Hypothesis

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

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

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

Falsifiability

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

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

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

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

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

Can a Hypothesis be Proven?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to Write a Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

More Examples

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

How to Develop a Good Research Hypothesis

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

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

Table of Contents

What is Hypothesis?

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

What is a Research Hypothesis?

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

Characteristics of a Good Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

Source: Educational Hub

How to formulate a research hypothesis.

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

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

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

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

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

3. Define the variables

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

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

4. Scrutinize the hypothesis

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

Types of Research Hypothesis

The types of research hypothesis are stated below:

1. Simple Hypothesis

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

2. Complex Hypothesis

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

3. Directional Hypothesis

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

4. Non-directional Hypothesis

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

5. Associative and Causal Hypothesis

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

6. Null Hypothesis

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

7. Alternative Hypothesis

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

Research Hypothesis Examples of Independent and Dependent Variables

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

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

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

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

Importance of a Testable Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

Frequently Asked Questions

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks a lot for your valuable guidance.

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

Useful piece!

This is awesome.Wow.

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

Nicely explained

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

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

clear and concise. thanks.

So Good so Amazing

Good to learn

Thanks a lot for explaining to my level of understanding

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

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

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

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

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

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

• Industry News

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

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

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

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

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

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

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

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

How to Design Effective Research Questionnaires for Robust Findings

Sign-up to read more

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

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

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

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

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

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

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

Home Market Research

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

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

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

What is a Research Hypothesis?

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

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

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

Importance of Hypothesis in Research

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

• A research hypothesis helps test theories.

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

• It serves as a great platform for investigation activities.

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

• Hypothesis guides the research work or study.

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

• Hypothesis sometimes suggests theories.

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

• It helps in knowing the data needs.

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

• The hypothesis explains social phenomena.

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

• Hypothesis provides a relationship between phenomena for empirical Testing.

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

• It helps in knowing the most suitable analysis technique.

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

Characteristics of a Good Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

Types of Research Hypotheses

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

01. Null Hypothesis

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

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

02. Alternative Hypothesis

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

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

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

03. Directional Hypothesis

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

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

04. Non-directional Hypothesis

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

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

05. Simple Hypothesis

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

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

06. Complex Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

07. Associative Hypothesis

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

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

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

08. Causal Hypothesis

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

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

09. Empirical Hypothesis

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

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

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

10. Statistical Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

How to Develop a Research Hypotheses?

Step 1: identify your research problem or topic..

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

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

Step 2: Conduct a literature review

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

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

Step 3: Formulate your research question

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

Step 4: Identify variables

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

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

Step 5: State the Null hypothesis

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

Step 6: Select appropriate methods for testing the hypothesis

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

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

Testing and Evaluating Hypotheses

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

• State your research hypothesis.

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

• Collect data strategically.

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

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

• Perform an appropriate statistical test.

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

• Decide if your idea was right or wrong.

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

• Share what you found.

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

The Role of QuestionPro to Develop a Good Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

LEARN MORE         FREE TRIAL

MORE LIKE THIS

Top 17 UX Research Software for UX Design in 2024

Apr 5, 2024

Healthcare Staff Burnout: What it Is + How To Manage It

Apr 4, 2024

Top 15 Employee Retention Software in 2024

Top 10 Employee Development Software for Talent Growth

Apr 3, 2024

Other categories

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

• Manuscript Preparation

What is and How to Write a Good Hypothesis in Research?

• 4 minute read
• 289.2K views

Table of Contents

One of the most important aspects of conducting research is constructing a strong hypothesis. But what makes a hypothesis in research effective? In this article, we’ll look at the difference between a hypothesis and a research question, as well as the elements of a good hypothesis in research. We’ll also include some examples of effective hypotheses, and what pitfalls to avoid.

What is a Hypothesis in Research?

Simply put, a hypothesis is a research question that also includes the predicted or expected result of the research. Without a hypothesis, there can be no basis for a scientific or research experiment. As such, it is critical that you carefully construct your hypothesis by being deliberate and thorough, even before you set pen to paper. Unless your hypothesis is clearly and carefully constructed, any flaw can have an adverse, and even grave, effect on the quality of your experiment and its subsequent results.

Research Question vs Hypothesis

It’s easy to confuse research questions with hypotheses, and vice versa. While they’re both critical to the Scientific Method, they have very specific differences. Primarily, a research question, just like a hypothesis, is focused and concise. But a hypothesis includes a prediction based on the proposed research, and is designed to forecast the relationship of and between two (or more) variables. Research questions are open-ended, and invite debate and discussion, while hypotheses are closed, e.g. “The relationship between A and B will be C.”

A hypothesis is generally used if your research topic is fairly well established, and you are relatively certain about the relationship between the variables that will be presented in your research. Since a hypothesis is ideally suited for experimental studies, it will, by its very existence, affect the design of your experiment. The research question is typically used for new topics that have not yet been researched extensively. Here, the relationship between different variables is less known. There is no prediction made, but there may be variables explored. The research question can be casual in nature, simply trying to understand if a relationship even exists, descriptive or comparative.

How to Write Hypothesis in Research

Writing an effective hypothesis starts before you even begin to type. Like any task, preparation is key, so you start first by conducting research yourself, and reading all you can about the topic that you plan to research. From there, you’ll gain the knowledge you need to understand where your focus within the topic will lie.

Remember that a hypothesis is a prediction of the relationship that exists between two or more variables. Your job is to write a hypothesis, and design the research, to “prove” whether or not your prediction is correct. A common pitfall is to use judgments that are subjective and inappropriate for the construction of a hypothesis. It’s important to keep the focus and language of your hypothesis objective.

An effective hypothesis in research is clearly and concisely written, and any terms or definitions clarified and defined. Specific language must also be used to avoid any generalities or assumptions.

Use the following points as a checklist to evaluate the effectiveness of your research hypothesis:

• Predicts the relationship and outcome
• Simple and concise – avoid wordiness
• Clear with no ambiguity or assumptions about the readers’ knowledge
• Observable and testable results
• Relevant and specific to the research question or problem

Research Hypothesis Example

Perhaps the best way to evaluate whether or not your hypothesis is effective is to compare it to those of your colleagues in the field. There is no need to reinvent the wheel when it comes to writing a powerful research hypothesis. As you’re reading and preparing your hypothesis, you’ll also read other hypotheses. These can help guide you on what works, and what doesn’t, when it comes to writing a strong research hypothesis.

Here are a few generic examples to get you started.

Eating an apple each day, after the age of 60, will result in a reduction of frequency of physician visits.

Budget airlines are more likely to receive more customer complaints. A budget airline is defined as an airline that offers lower fares and fewer amenities than a traditional full-service airline. (Note that the term “budget airline” is included in the hypothesis.

Workplaces that offer flexible working hours report higher levels of employee job satisfaction than workplaces with fixed hours.

Each of the above examples are specific, observable and measurable, and the statement of prediction can be verified or shown to be false by utilizing standard experimental practices. It should be noted, however, that often your hypothesis will change as your research progresses.

Language Editing Plus

Elsevier’s Language Editing Plus service can help ensure that your research hypothesis is well-designed, and articulates your research and conclusions. Our most comprehensive editing package, you can count on a thorough language review by native-English speakers who are PhDs or PhD candidates. We’ll check for effective logic and flow of your manuscript, as well as document formatting for your chosen journal, reference checks, and much more.

• Research Process

Systematic Literature Review or Literature Review?

What is a Problem Statement? [with examples]

You may also like.

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

Can Describing Study Limitations Improve the Quality of Your Paper?

A Guide to Crafting Shorter, Impactful Sentences in Academic Writing

6 Steps to Write an Excellent Discussion in Your Manuscript

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

The Clear Path to An Impactful Paper: ②

The Essentials of Writing to Communicate Research in Medicine

Changing Lines: Sentence Patterns in Academic Writing

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

• What Are The Types of Research Hypothesis? + [Examples]

It is vital to fully understand a hypothesis to address the types of research hypotheses. A hypothesis explains an established or known fact that has not yet been proven or validated.

Simply put, it is a statement explaining why and how a particular thing works based on philosophical assumptions and facts.

For example, a hypothesis goes like this;

A patient is likely to trust the pediatrician’s diagnosis based on the perception that the doctor is well-versed in the practice of medicine.

A hypothesis is a basis for scientific research or experiment, usually coined as a research hypothesis.

Three attributes or features measure the viability of a research hypothesis, and they are as follows.

• A research hypothesis must be specific, testable or measurable, and verifiable. In other words, the research hypothesis should create clear predictions than can be tested.
• Ideally, a hypothesis can be drawn from previous theoretical research publications.
• A good research hypothesis is much more than an intelligent guess, and sometimes, a research hypothesis could take the form of research questions that can be explored further via research and suggest an expected result.

Research hypotheses are a vital part of the scientific process that leads to or are the reasons for scientific experiments. That said, a slight flaw in constructing a hypothesis could generate negative results.

There are various types of hypotheses, and the following checklist should guide a good hypothesis.

• Is the language employed clear and direct?
• Is there a good relationship between the hypothesis and the research topic?
• Can the hypothesis be tested?
• What are the methods used to carry out testability?
• What are areas of explanation being addressed?

The essence of this checklist is to get your hypothesis up on the right footing and help you pinpoint any gaps or weaknesses.

The following listed below are the various 7 types of research hypotheses.

1. Simple Hypothesis

It can show the impact of a relationship between a single dependent variable and a single independent variable. For example,

Consuming too many fizzy drinks will cause weight gain and a bloated belly.

2. Complex Hypothesis

It foretells the relationship between multiple independent and dependent variables.

For instance, eating more vegetables and a low-calorie diet would lead to weight loss.

3. Directional Hypothesis

It shows the expected direction required to determine the relationship between variables and is derived from theory. Furthermore, it shows a researcher’s intellectual commitment to a particular outcome by the length of the study.

For example,

Toddlers under the age of 4 who were given well-balanced meals for 5 years showed a higher IQ level than their counterparts who did not have the same treatments.

4. Non-directional Hypothesis

It does not predict the direction or nature of the relationship between the two variables. A non-directional hypothesis is used mostly when there is no theory involved. For example, men and women differ in terms of helpfulness.

5. Associative and Causal Hypothesis

The associative hypothesis shows the interdependency between related variables. A change in one variable results will cause a change in the other variable. However, the change is not caused by either of the variables.

For example, the increase in the number of unhealthy people visiting a particular hospital is not because the hospital is the source of their illness. Rather it could be a result of other unrelated factors like the weather, personal hygiene practices, etc.

On the other hand, the causal hypothesis predicts the effect a change in variables would have on different variables. For instance, a change in the writing style on their blog led to higher user engagement.

6. Null Hypothesis

This refers to a lack of relationship between different variables. For example, plants would grow irrespective of the source of water, natural or artificial. It proposes a negative statement to support the researcher’s discovery, showing that no relationship exists between the two variables.

7. Alternative Hypothesis

The alternative hypothesis is a statement used in statistical experiments. It is the opposite of the null hypothesis and is described by the term H1 or Ha. The term alternative is used because it is the alternative to the null hypothesis. Therefore it is safe to say that it is an alternative theory to the one a researcher is testing and trying to prove.

The Alternative Hypothesis is classified into two categories;

Directional and Non-Directional.

• Directional: A statement outlining the ways the expected outcomes would be collated. It is mostly used in cases where there is a need to establish a relationship between two different things or when comparing various groups. For example, Attending physiotherapy sessions will improve the stage performance of ballerinas.
• Non-directional: This implies no direction for the expected results. For example, attending physiotherapy sessions impacts the stage performance of ballerinas.

The directional statement clearly states that the physiotherapy sessions would boost performance in both examples outlined above. At the same time, the non-directional only acknowledges that the sessions would influence performance without stating whether the influence would be positive or negative.

8. Empirical Hypothesis

When a theory is proven through an experiment and observation, this justifies or validates a claim and distinguishes it from a wild guess.

Here are a few examples that depict the empirical hypothesis:

a. Women who take folate supplements face a lesser risk of having children with congenital disabilities.

b. Good behavior in children can be reinforced when they are rewarded for good behavior.

9. Statistical Hypothesis

It is a statement that postulates a theory based on studying a sample population. It is a logic-based analysis where a specific population is researched to gather evidence to prove a particular theory.

For example:

43% of the American population in the age group of 22-29 speak a second language.

Importance of a Testable Hypothesis

Testability in the hypothesis is crucial in establishing any scientific research in the physical world. This is because research or any science founded on a hypothesis is usually laced with inherent flaws. One of the flaws is the idea that any hypothesis by design significantly reduces the area of exploration, which births experimental results that would fail in real-life scenarios.

This problem is further compounded by modern science, which equates philosophical concepts to physical science. Testability solves these problems by making the research hypothesis more truthful, based on real tenable results. Hence any well-thought-out hypothesis would be founded in testability.

The condition for any viable hypothesis is testability. To be considered testable, the following criteria must be fulfilled.

• There must exist a viable means to prove that the hypothesis is true.
• Similarly, there must be a possibility to prove the hypothesis false.
• Finally, the result of the hypothesis must be replicable.

Without these testability criteria, the hypothesis and proposed results would be indefinite, and the significance of the experiment would be lost.

How To Formulate an Effective Research Hypothesis

There are clear and precise steps to creating an effective research hypothesis. An effective research hypothesis must answer these 6 questions;

What, who, where, when, how, and why?.

In the scientific method, the first step is to ask a question. Frame this question using the classic six highlighted above. For example:

• How long does it take avocados to grow?
• Why do we have shorter days and longer nights in winter?
• What happened to the groundnut pyramids?
• How does a caterpillar become a butterfly?
• Why are students excited on Friday afternoon?
• How does sleep affect motivation?
• Why do tax systems help build an economy?

So the first step is to identify and state what problem you are trying to solve. The hypothesis must clearly define the subject, the experiment’s focus, and the expected outcome.

Put together preliminary research data from a wide range of sources, including academic journals, personal experiments, and observations from the work of others. Afterward, define the variables, and separate the dependent variables from the independent variables.

The independent variables are the ones that are malleable and can be tweaked, controlled, changed, and affected by various conditions. Secondly, independent variables are isolated from other factors of the research.

On the other hand, dependent variables rely on other aspects of the research and are affected by any change in the independent variable.

Refine your hypothesis by emulating the following as a checklist:

• Specific language devoid of any ambiguity must be used.
• Clearly predict the relationship between the variables and the expected outcome.
• No prior assumptions should be made about the reader’s knowledge.
• The results must be testable, relevant, and specific to the research questions.

However, one of the proven methods of determining the effectiveness of your research hypothesis is to compare it to an already-existing hypothesis. It would help guide and make the process easier.

Here are a few general examples that can guide you in formulating your hypothesis:

a. Eating a generous amount of fiber-rich fruits like apples after age 50 would keep the doctor away or limit visits to the doctor’s office.

b. Cheap airlines, referred to as budget airlines, will receive more customer complaints than regular or premium airlines because of the limited amenities provided compared to full-service airlines.

Stating the obvious, the final step is to write your hypothesis using all the steps outlined. It is important to remember that your hypothesis is a statement that shows who or what is being studied, the variables, and your predicted outcome.

Hypothesis in Research

We have already established that a hypothesis is an idea or a statement based on tangible evidence that can be proven. A hypothesis in research is simply a statement concerning the predicted outcome of a scientific study. In this instance, it has to be specific, testable, and falsifiable.

Specific here refers to clarity about the parties involved and the expected results.

For example, a patient’s perception of a doctor’s experience breeds a higher level of trust in the doctor’s diagnosis.

This example depicts the clarity and directness of the subject. There is no ambiguity in the expectations of the relationship referred to.

Testability in research hypothesis is simply saying that the hypothesis must be provable. This means that the data gathered must be collected and observed in a thorough scientific process to assess the quality of the hypothesis. In other words, there must be a proven way to validate the claims of the hypothesis.

For example, the doctor referred to in the previous hypothesis can be validated by other patients’ perceptions of his competence and previous results from past diagnoses. A quantitative research approach using a large number of people would have been used to test the claims of this hypothesis.

The falsifiability in the research hypothesis means that the hypothesis can be refuted. This step is essential in validating or establishing the viability of the hypothesis. Hence there has to be an emphatic way of confirming if a hypothesis is false.

The claim is that life exists on planets like the earth. This claim cannot be a hypothesis because the only way to verify this would be to visit all planets in the world and come back with evidence of life. This claim is not disprovable.

So when conducting a hypothesis in research, it is vital to meet all these criteria to have an effective hypothesis.

Hypothesis in Statistics

A hypothesis in statistics is a legal claim about a subject within the framework of a statistical model. It is a process of statistical inference to determine if the data collated is inadequate to prove a hypothesis. The data used here can be gleaned from a large population. A statistical analyst verifies a hypothesis by analyzing a random sample of the population.

In this case, the random population sample is used to test 2 different hypotheses; the null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis.

4 Steps of Statistical Hypothesis Testing

There is a four-step process used for statistical hypothesis testing.

• State only two hypotheses; that way, only one can be right.
• Create an analysis plan that shows how the data would be evaluated.
• Implement the plan by physically analyzing the sample data
• Analyze the result and either accept the hypothesis or state the plausible hypothesis based on the given data.

For example, if you want to carry a test on, say, 50% of exceptional college students come from wealthy homes.

The null hypothesis would be that 50%  of the students are from wealthy homes, while the alternative hypothesis would be that 50% of the students are not from wealthy homes.

A random sample of 100 students in the said college would be carried out via a survey, and the null hypothesis would be tested.

If 40 of those students are not from wealthy homes, then the 50% null hypothesis would be rejected, and the alternative hypothesis would be accepted.

Scientific Hypothesis

In the scientific hypothesis, the researcher’s expectation from the experiment is achieved following a scientific method outlined below:

• Create the question
• Carry out a background research
• Creating a hypothesis
• Design an experiment
• Collect data
• Analyze the results
• Reach a conclusion
• Share the results

In the scientific hypothesis, the statement is a prediction; then, it evolves into a question, answered via research. It is at the point the hypothesis states the desired expectation. The next step after this is to test the hypothesis.

For example, the effect of Vitamin C supplements for a patient with cold symptoms is that the medication would help alleviate the effects of the cold.

As we established, a hypothesis predicts a relationship between variables that is yet to be proven. Creating a viable research hypothesis involves conducting research and broadening your knowledge about the subject via studying in other to choose the area of focus. Different types of hypotheses can be adopted to validate your predictions. The hypothesis should be testable in other to validate the claims.

Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!

• research hypothesis
• scientific research
• survey statistics
• Angela Kayode-Sanni

You may also like:

Market Research: Types, Methods & Survey Examples

A complete guide on market research; definitions, survey examples, templates, importance and tips.

What is Pure or Basic Research? + [Examples & Method]

Simple guide on pure or basic research, its methods, characteristics, advantages, and examples in science, medicine, education and psychology

Recall Bias: Definition, Types, Examples & Mitigation

This article will discuss the impact of recall bias in studies and the best ways to avoid them during research.

Exploratory Research: What are its Method & Examples?

Overview on exploratory research, examples and methodology. Shows guides on how to conduct exploratory research with online surveys

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..

Choose Your Test

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

General Education

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

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

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

So let’s get started!

What Is a Hypothesis?

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

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

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

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

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

Independent and Dependent Variables 

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

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

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

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

Elements of a Good Hypothesis

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

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

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

Writing Your Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

The Two Types of Hypotheses

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

#1: If-Then Hypotheses

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

If ____ happens, then ____ will happen.

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

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

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

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

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

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

#2: Null Hypotheses

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 Tips to Write the Best Hypothesis

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

#1: Plausibility

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

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

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

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

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

#2: Defined Concepts

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

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

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

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

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

Good hypotheses ensure that you can observe the results. 

#3: Observability

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

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

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

#4: Generalizability 

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

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

Hypothesis Testing Examples

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here’s what your hypotheses might look like: 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key Takeaways: Hypothesis Writing

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

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

What’s Next?

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

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

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

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

Student and Parent Forum

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

Ask a Question Below

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

Improve With Our Famous Guides

• For All Students

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

How to Get a Perfect 1600, by a Perfect Scorer

Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section:

Score 800 on SAT Math

Score 800 on SAT Reading

Score 800 on SAT Writing

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

Score 600 on SAT Math

Score 600 on SAT Reading

Score 600 on SAT Writing

Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests

What SAT Target Score Should You Be Aiming For?

15 Strategies to Improve Your SAT Essay

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

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

Series: How to Get 36 on Each ACT Section:

36 on ACT English

36 on ACT Math

36 on ACT Reading

36 on ACT Science

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

24 on ACT English

24 on ACT Math

24 on ACT Reading

24 on ACT Science

What ACT target score should you be aiming for?

ACT Vocabulary You Must Know

ACT Writing: 15 Tips to Raise Your Essay Score

How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League

How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA

How to Write an Amazing College Essay

What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?

Is the ACT easier than the SAT? A Comprehensive Guide

Should you retake your SAT or ACT?

When should you take the SAT or ACT?

Stay Informed

Get the latest articles and test prep tips!

Looking for Graduate School Test Prep?

Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here:

GRE Online Prep Blog

GMAT Online Prep Blog

TOEFL Online Prep Blog

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

• 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.

7.3: The Research Hypothesis and the Null Hypothesis

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 18038

• Michelle Oja
• Taft College

Hypotheses are predictions of expected findings.

The Research Hypothesis

A research hypothesis is a mathematical way of stating a research question.  A research hypothesis names the groups (we'll start with a sample and a population), what was measured, and which we think will have a higher mean.  The last one gives the research hypothesis a direction.  In other words, a research hypothesis should include:

• The name of the groups being compared.  This is sometimes considered the IV.
• What was measured.  This is the DV.
• Which group are we predicting will have the higher mean.  

There are two types of research hypotheses related to sample means and population means:  Directional Research Hypotheses and Non-Directional Research Hypotheses

Directional Research Hypothesis

If we expect our obtained sample mean to be above or below the other group's mean (the population mean, for example), we have a directional hypothesis. There are two options:

• Symbol:       \( \displaystyle \bar{X} > \mu \)
• (The mean of the sample is greater than than the mean of the population.)
• Symbol:     \( \displaystyle \bar{X} < \mu \)
• (The mean of the sample is less than than mean of the population.)

Example \(\PageIndex{1}\)

A study by Blackwell, Trzesniewski, and Dweck (2007) measured growth mindset and how long the junior high student participants spent on their math homework.  What’s a directional hypothesis for how scoring higher on growth mindset (compared to the population of junior high students) would be related to how long students spent on their homework?  Write this out in words and symbols.

Answer in Words:            Students who scored high on growth mindset would spend more time on their homework than the population of junior high students.

Answer in Symbols:         \( \displaystyle \bar{X} > \mu \) 

Non-Directional Research Hypothesis

A non-directional hypothesis states that the means will be different, but does not specify which will be higher.  In reality, there is rarely a situation in which we actually don't want one group to be higher than the other, so we will focus on directional research hypotheses.  There is only one option for a non-directional research hypothesis: "The sample mean differs from the population mean."  These types of research hypotheses don’t give a direction, the hypothesis doesn’t say which will be higher or lower.

A non-directional research hypothesis in symbols should look like this:    \( \displaystyle \bar{X} \neq \mu \) (The mean of the sample is not equal to the mean of the population).

Exercise \(\PageIndex{1}\)

What’s a non-directional hypothesis for how scoring higher on growth mindset higher on growth mindset (compared to the population of junior high students) would be related to how long students spent on their homework (Blackwell, Trzesniewski, & Dweck, 2007)?  Write this out in words and symbols.

Answer in Words:            Students who scored high on growth mindset would spend a different amount of time on their homework than the population of junior high students.

Answer in Symbols:        \( \displaystyle \bar{X} \neq \mu \) 

See how a non-directional research hypothesis doesn't really make sense?  The big issue is not if the two groups differ, but if one group seems to improve what was measured (if having a growth mindset leads to more time spent on math homework).  This textbook will only use directional research hypotheses because researchers almost always have a predicted direction (meaning that we almost always know which group we think will score higher).

The Null Hypothesis

The hypothesis that an apparent effect is due to chance is called the null hypothesis, written \(H_0\) (“H-naught”). We usually test this through comparing an experimental group to a comparison (control) group.  This null hypothesis can be written as:

\[\mathrm{H}_{0}: \bar{X} = \mu \nonumber \]

For most of this textbook, the null hypothesis is that the means of the two groups are similar.  Much later, the null hypothesis will be that there is no relationship between the two groups.  Either way, remember that a null hypothesis is always saying that nothing is different.  

This is where descriptive statistics diverge from inferential statistics.  We know what the value of \(\overline{\mathrm{X}}\) is – it’s not a mystery or a question, it is what we observed from the sample.  What we are using inferential statistics to do is infer whether this sample's descriptive statistics probably represents the population's descriptive statistics.  This is the null hypothesis, that the two groups are similar.  

Keep in mind that the null hypothesis is typically the opposite of the research hypothesis. A research hypothesis for the ESP example is that those in my sample who say that they have ESP would get more correct answers than the population would get correct, while the null hypothesis is that the average number correct for the two groups will be similar. 

In general, the null hypothesis is the idea that nothing is going on: there is no effect of our treatment, no relation between our variables, and no difference in our sample mean from what we expected about the population mean. This is always our baseline starting assumption, and it is what we seek to reject. If we are trying to treat depression, we want to find a difference in average symptoms between our treatment and control groups. If we are trying to predict job performance, we want to find a relation between conscientiousness and evaluation scores. However, until we have evidence against it, we must use the null hypothesis as our starting point.

In sum, the null hypothesis is always : There is no difference between the groups’ means OR There is no relationship between the variables .

In the next chapter, the null hypothesis is that there’s no difference between the sample mean   and population mean.  In other words:

• There is no mean difference between the sample and population.
• The mean of the sample is the same as the mean of a specific population.
• \(\mathrm{H}_{0}: \bar{X} = \mu \nonumber \)
• We expect our sample’s mean to be same as the population mean.

Exercise \(\PageIndex{2}\)

A study by Blackwell, Trzesniewski, and Dweck (2007) measured growth mindset and how long the junior high student participants spent on their math homework.  What’s the null hypothesis for scoring higher on growth mindset (compared to the population of junior high students) and how long students spent on their homework?  Write this out in words and symbols.

Answer in Words:            Students who scored high on growth mindset would spend a similar amount of time on their homework as the population of junior high students.

Answer in Symbols:    \( \bar{X} = \mu \)

Contributors and Attributions

Foster et al.  (University of Missouri-St. Louis, Rice University, & University of Houston, Downtown Campus)

Dr. MO ( Taft College )

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
• v.53(4); 2010 Aug

Research questions, hypotheses and objectives

Patricia farrugia.

* Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, the

Bradley A. Petrisor

† Division of Orthopaedic Surgery and the

Forough Farrokhyar

‡ Departments of Surgery and

§ Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont

Mohit Bhandari

There is an increasing familiarity with the principles of evidence-based medicine in the surgical community. As surgeons become more aware of the hierarchy of evidence, grades of recommendations and the principles of critical appraisal, they develop an increasing familiarity with research design. Surgeons and clinicians are looking more and more to the literature and clinical trials to guide their practice; as such, it is becoming a responsibility of the clinical research community to attempt to answer questions that are not only well thought out but also clinically relevant. The development of the research question, including a supportive hypothesis and objectives, is a necessary key step in producing clinically relevant results to be used in evidence-based practice. A well-defined and specific research question is more likely to help guide us in making decisions about study design and population and subsequently what data will be collected and analyzed. 1

Objectives of this article

In this article, we discuss important considerations in the development of a research question and hypothesis and in defining objectives for research. By the end of this article, the reader will be able to appreciate the significance of constructing a good research question and developing hypotheses and research objectives for the successful design of a research study. The following article is divided into 3 sections: research question, research hypothesis and research objectives.

Research question

Interest in a particular topic usually begins the research process, but it is the familiarity with the subject that helps define an appropriate research question for a study. 1 Questions then arise out of a perceived knowledge deficit within a subject area or field of study. 2 Indeed, Haynes suggests that it is important to know “where the boundary between current knowledge and ignorance lies.” 1 The challenge in developing an appropriate research question is in determining which clinical uncertainties could or should be studied and also rationalizing the need for their investigation.

Increasing one’s knowledge about the subject of interest can be accomplished in many ways. Appropriate methods include systematically searching the literature, in-depth interviews and focus groups with patients (and proxies) and interviews with experts in the field. In addition, awareness of current trends and technological advances can assist with the development of research questions. 2 It is imperative to understand what has been studied about a topic to date in order to further the knowledge that has been previously gathered on a topic. Indeed, some granting institutions (e.g., Canadian Institute for Health Research) encourage applicants to conduct a systematic review of the available evidence if a recent review does not already exist and preferably a pilot or feasibility study before applying for a grant for a full trial.

In-depth knowledge about a subject may generate a number of questions. It then becomes necessary to ask whether these questions can be answered through one study or if more than one study needed. 1 Additional research questions can be developed, but several basic principles should be taken into consideration. 1 All questions, primary and secondary, should be developed at the beginning and planning stages of a study. Any additional questions should never compromise the primary question because it is the primary research question that forms the basis of the hypothesis and study objectives. It must be kept in mind that within the scope of one study, the presence of a number of research questions will affect and potentially increase the complexity of both the study design and subsequent statistical analyses, not to mention the actual feasibility of answering every question. 1 A sensible strategy is to establish a single primary research question around which to focus the study plan. 3 In a study, the primary research question should be clearly stated at the end of the introduction of the grant proposal, and it usually specifies the population to be studied, the intervention to be implemented and other circumstantial factors. 4

Hulley and colleagues 2 have suggested the use of the FINER criteria in the development of a good research question ( Box 1 ). The FINER criteria highlight useful points that may increase the chances of developing a successful research project. A good research question should specify the population of interest, be of interest to the scientific community and potentially to the public, have clinical relevance and further current knowledge in the field (and of course be compliant with the standards of ethical boards and national research standards).

FINER criteria for a good research question

Adapted with permission from Wolters Kluwer Health. 2

Whereas the FINER criteria outline the important aspects of the question in general, a useful format to use in the development of a specific research question is the PICO format — consider the population (P) of interest, the intervention (I) being studied, the comparison (C) group (or to what is the intervention being compared) and the outcome of interest (O). 3 , 5 , 6 Often timing (T) is added to PICO ( Box 2 ) — that is, “Over what time frame will the study take place?” 1 The PICOT approach helps generate a question that aids in constructing the framework of the study and subsequently in protocol development by alluding to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and identifying the groups of patients to be included. Knowing the specific population of interest, intervention (and comparator) and outcome of interest may also help the researcher identify an appropriate outcome measurement tool. 7 The more defined the population of interest, and thus the more stringent the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the greater the effect on the interpretation and subsequent applicability and generalizability of the research findings. 1 , 2 A restricted study population (and exclusion criteria) may limit bias and increase the internal validity of the study; however, this approach will limit external validity of the study and, thus, the generalizability of the findings to the practical clinical setting. Conversely, a broadly defined study population and inclusion criteria may be representative of practical clinical practice but may increase bias and reduce the internal validity of the study.

PICOT criteria 1

A poorly devised research question may affect the choice of study design, potentially lead to futile situations and, thus, hamper the chance of determining anything of clinical significance, which will then affect the potential for publication. Without devoting appropriate resources to developing the research question, the quality of the study and subsequent results may be compromised. During the initial stages of any research study, it is therefore imperative to formulate a research question that is both clinically relevant and answerable.

Research hypothesis

The primary research question should be driven by the hypothesis rather than the data. 1 , 2 That is, the research question and hypothesis should be developed before the start of the study. This sounds intuitive; however, if we take, for example, a database of information, it is potentially possible to perform multiple statistical comparisons of groups within the database to find a statistically significant association. This could then lead one to work backward from the data and develop the “question.” This is counterintuitive to the process because the question is asked specifically to then find the answer, thus collecting data along the way (i.e., in a prospective manner). Multiple statistical testing of associations from data previously collected could potentially lead to spuriously positive findings of association through chance alone. 2 Therefore, a good hypothesis must be based on a good research question at the start of a trial and, indeed, drive data collection for the study.

The research or clinical hypothesis is developed from the research question and then the main elements of the study — sampling strategy, intervention (if applicable), comparison and outcome variables — are summarized in a form that establishes the basis for testing, statistical and ultimately clinical significance. 3 For example, in a research study comparing computer-assisted acetabular component insertion versus freehand acetabular component placement in patients in need of total hip arthroplasty, the experimental group would be computer-assisted insertion and the control/conventional group would be free-hand placement. The investigative team would first state a research hypothesis. This could be expressed as a single outcome (e.g., computer-assisted acetabular component placement leads to improved functional outcome) or potentially as a complex/composite outcome; that is, more than one outcome (e.g., computer-assisted acetabular component placement leads to both improved radiographic cup placement and improved functional outcome).

However, when formally testing statistical significance, the hypothesis should be stated as a “null” hypothesis. 2 The purpose of hypothesis testing is to make an inference about the population of interest on the basis of a random sample taken from that population. The null hypothesis for the preceding research hypothesis then would be that there is no difference in mean functional outcome between the computer-assisted insertion and free-hand placement techniques. After forming the null hypothesis, the researchers would form an alternate hypothesis stating the nature of the difference, if it should appear. The alternate hypothesis would be that there is a difference in mean functional outcome between these techniques. At the end of the study, the null hypothesis is then tested statistically. If the findings of the study are not statistically significant (i.e., there is no difference in functional outcome between the groups in a statistical sense), we cannot reject the null hypothesis, whereas if the findings were significant, we can reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternate hypothesis (i.e., there is a difference in mean functional outcome between the study groups), errors in testing notwithstanding. In other words, hypothesis testing confirms or refutes the statement that the observed findings did not occur by chance alone but rather occurred because there was a true difference in outcomes between these surgical procedures. The concept of statistical hypothesis testing is complex, and the details are beyond the scope of this article.

Another important concept inherent in hypothesis testing is whether the hypotheses will be 1-sided or 2-sided. A 2-sided hypothesis states that there is a difference between the experimental group and the control group, but it does not specify in advance the expected direction of the difference. For example, we asked whether there is there an improvement in outcomes with computer-assisted surgery or whether the outcomes worse with computer-assisted surgery. We presented a 2-sided test in the above example because we did not specify the direction of the difference. A 1-sided hypothesis states a specific direction (e.g., there is an improvement in outcomes with computer-assisted surgery). A 2-sided hypothesis should be used unless there is a good justification for using a 1-sided hypothesis. As Bland and Atlman 8 stated, “One-sided hypothesis testing should never be used as a device to make a conventionally nonsignificant difference significant.”

The research hypothesis should be stated at the beginning of the study to guide the objectives for research. Whereas the investigators may state the hypothesis as being 1-sided (there is an improvement with treatment), the study and investigators must adhere to the concept of clinical equipoise. According to this principle, a clinical (or surgical) trial is ethical only if the expert community is uncertain about the relative therapeutic merits of the experimental and control groups being evaluated. 9 It means there must exist an honest and professional disagreement among expert clinicians about the preferred treatment. 9

Designing a research hypothesis is supported by a good research question and will influence the type of research design for the study. Acting on the principles of appropriate hypothesis development, the study can then confidently proceed to the development of the research objective.

Research objective

The primary objective should be coupled with the hypothesis of the study. Study objectives define the specific aims of the study and should be clearly stated in the introduction of the research protocol. 7 From our previous example and using the investigative hypothesis that there is a difference in functional outcomes between computer-assisted acetabular component placement and free-hand placement, the primary objective can be stated as follows: this study will compare the functional outcomes of computer-assisted acetabular component insertion versus free-hand placement in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Note that the study objective is an active statement about how the study is going to answer the specific research question. Objectives can (and often do) state exactly which outcome measures are going to be used within their statements. They are important because they not only help guide the development of the protocol and design of study but also play a role in sample size calculations and determining the power of the study. 7 These concepts will be discussed in other articles in this series.

From the surgeon’s point of view, it is important for the study objectives to be focused on outcomes that are important to patients and clinically relevant. For example, the most methodologically sound randomized controlled trial comparing 2 techniques of distal radial fixation would have little or no clinical impact if the primary objective was to determine the effect of treatment A as compared to treatment B on intraoperative fluoroscopy time. However, if the objective was to determine the effect of treatment A as compared to treatment B on patient functional outcome at 1 year, this would have a much more significant impact on clinical decision-making. Second, more meaningful surgeon–patient discussions could ensue, incorporating patient values and preferences with the results from this study. 6 , 7 It is the precise objective and what the investigator is trying to measure that is of clinical relevance in the practical setting.

The following is an example from the literature about the relation between the research question, hypothesis and study objectives:

Study: Warden SJ, Metcalf BR, Kiss ZS, et al. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound for chronic patellar tendinopathy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Rheumatology 2008;47:467–71.

Research question: How does low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) compare with a placebo device in managing the symptoms of skeletally mature patients with patellar tendinopathy?

Research hypothesis: Pain levels are reduced in patients who receive daily active-LIPUS (treatment) for 12 weeks compared with individuals who receive inactive-LIPUS (placebo).

Objective: To investigate the clinical efficacy of LIPUS in the management of patellar tendinopathy symptoms.

The development of the research question is the most important aspect of a research project. A research project can fail if the objectives and hypothesis are poorly focused and underdeveloped. Useful tips for surgical researchers are provided in Box 3 . Designing and developing an appropriate and relevant research question, hypothesis and objectives can be a difficult task. The critical appraisal of the research question used in a study is vital to the application of the findings to clinical practice. Focusing resources, time and dedication to these 3 very important tasks will help to guide a successful research project, influence interpretation of the results and affect future publication efforts.

Tips for developing research questions, hypotheses and objectives for research studies

• Perform a systematic literature review (if one has not been done) to increase knowledge and familiarity with the topic and to assist with research development.
• Learn about current trends and technological advances on the topic.
• Seek careful input from experts, mentors, colleagues and collaborators to refine your research question as this will aid in developing the research question and guide the research study.
• Use the FINER criteria in the development of the research question.
• Ensure that the research question follows PICOT format.
• Develop a research hypothesis from the research question.
• Develop clear and well-defined primary and secondary (if needed) objectives.
• Ensure that the research question and objectives are answerable, feasible and clinically relevant.

FINER = feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, relevant; PICOT = population (patients), intervention (for intervention studies only), comparison group, outcome of interest, time.

Competing interests: No funding was received in preparation of this paper. Dr. Bhandari was funded, in part, by a Canada Research Chair, McMaster University.

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Null and Alternative Hypotheses | Definitions & Examples

Null & Alternative Hypotheses | Definitions, Templates & Examples

Published on May 6, 2022 by Shaun Turney . Revised on June 22, 2023.

The null and alternative hypotheses are two competing claims that researchers weigh evidence for and against using a statistical test :

• Null hypothesis ( H 0 ): There’s no effect in the population .
• Alternative hypothesis ( H a or H 1 ) : There’s an effect in the population.

Table of contents

Answering your research question with hypotheses, what is a null hypothesis, what is an alternative hypothesis, similarities and differences between null and alternative hypotheses, how to write null and alternative hypotheses, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions.

The null and alternative hypotheses offer competing answers to your research question . When the research question asks “Does the independent variable affect the dependent variable?”:

• The null hypothesis ( H 0 ) answers “No, there’s no effect in the population.”
• The alternative hypothesis ( H a ) answers “Yes, there is an effect in the population.”

The null and alternative are always claims about the population. That’s because the goal of hypothesis testing is to make inferences about a population based on a sample . Often, we infer whether there’s an effect in the population by looking at differences between groups or relationships between variables in the sample. It’s critical for your research to write strong hypotheses .

You can use a statistical test to decide whether the evidence favors the null or alternative hypothesis. Each type of statistical test comes with a specific way of phrasing the null and alternative hypothesis. However, the hypotheses can also be phrased in a general way that applies to any test.

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

The null hypothesis is the claim that there’s no effect in the population.

If the sample provides enough evidence against the claim that there’s no effect in the population ( p ≤ α), then we can reject the null hypothesis . Otherwise, we fail to reject the null hypothesis.

Although “fail to reject” may sound awkward, it’s the only wording that statisticians accept . Be careful not to say you “prove” or “accept” the null hypothesis.

Null hypotheses often include phrases such as “no effect,” “no difference,” or “no relationship.” When written in mathematical terms, they always include an equality (usually =, but sometimes ≥ or ≤).

You can never know with complete certainty whether there is an effect in the population. Some percentage of the time, your inference about the population will be incorrect. When you incorrectly reject the null hypothesis, it’s called a type I error . When you incorrectly fail to reject it, it’s a type II error.

Examples of null hypotheses

The table below gives examples of research questions and null hypotheses. There’s always more than one way to answer a research question, but these null hypotheses can help you get started.

*Note that some researchers prefer to always write the null hypothesis in terms of “no effect” and “=”. It would be fine to say that daily meditation has no effect on the incidence of depression and p 1 = p 2 .

The alternative hypothesis ( H a ) is the other answer to your research question . It claims that there’s an effect in the population.

Often, your alternative hypothesis is the same as your research hypothesis. In other words, it’s the claim that you expect or hope will be true.

The alternative hypothesis is the complement to the null hypothesis. Null and alternative hypotheses are exhaustive, meaning that together they cover every possible outcome. They are also mutually exclusive, meaning that only one can be true at a time.

Alternative hypotheses often include phrases such as “an effect,” “a difference,” or “a relationship.” When alternative hypotheses are written in mathematical terms, they always include an inequality (usually ≠, but sometimes < or >). As with null hypotheses, there are many acceptable ways to phrase an alternative hypothesis.

Examples of alternative hypotheses

The table below gives examples of research questions and alternative hypotheses to help you get started with formulating your own.

Null and alternative hypotheses are similar in some ways:

• They’re both answers to the research question.
• They both make claims about the population.
• They’re both evaluated by statistical tests.

However, there are important differences between the two types of hypotheses, summarized in the following table.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

To help you write your hypotheses, you can use the template sentences below. If you know which statistical test you’re going to use, you can use the test-specific template sentences. Otherwise, you can use the general template sentences.

General template sentences

The only thing you need to know to use these general template sentences are your dependent and independent variables. To write your research question, null hypothesis, and alternative hypothesis, fill in the following sentences with your variables:

Does independent variable affect dependent variable ?

• Null hypothesis ( H 0 ): Independent variable does not affect dependent variable.
• Alternative hypothesis ( H a ): Independent variable affects dependent variable.

Test-specific template sentences

Once you know the statistical test you’ll be using, you can write your hypotheses in a more precise and mathematical way specific to the test you chose. The table below provides template sentences for common statistical tests.

Note: The template sentences above assume that you’re performing one-tailed tests . One-tailed tests are appropriate for most studies.

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

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

Methodology

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

Research bias

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

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

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

The null hypothesis is often abbreviated as H 0 . When the null hypothesis is written using mathematical symbols, it always includes an equality symbol (usually =, but sometimes ≥ or ≤).

The alternative hypothesis is often abbreviated as H a or H 1 . When the alternative hypothesis is written using mathematical symbols, it always includes an inequality symbol (usually ≠, but sometimes < or >).

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 Citation Generator.

Turney, S. (2023, June 22). Null & Alternative Hypotheses | Definitions, Templates & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 4, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/null-and-alternative-hypotheses/

Is this article helpful?

Shaun Turney

Other students also liked, inferential statistics | an easy introduction & examples, hypothesis testing | a step-by-step guide with easy examples, type i & type ii errors | differences, examples, visualizations, what is your plagiarism score.

• Nebraska Medicine

Understanding Hypothesis Testing, Significance Level, Power and Sample Size Calculation

• Written by Steph Langel
• Published Apr 4, 2024

This e-module offers an in-depth discussion of the essential components of hypothesis testing: significance levels, statistical power, and sample size calculations, which are fundamental to rigorous research methodology. Learners will develop a comprehensive understanding of designing, interpreting, and evaluating research findings through interactive content and real-world case studies. This will enable them to make well-informed decisions based on statistical best practices. The module’s framework allows a thorough learning experience, starting from fundamental definitions and progressing to the hands-on implementation of statistical ideas. This ensures that learners acquire the essential abilities to conduct ethically appropriate and scientifically valid research.

Course Number

Leave a comment Cancel reply

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

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

Recommended

How To Conduct Hypothesis Testing In R For Effective Data Analysis

Learn the essentials of hypothesis testing in R, a crucial skill for developers. This article guides you through setting up your environment, formulating hypotheses, executing tests, and interpreting results with practical examples

💡 KEY INSIGHTS

• Hypothesis testing involves using a random population sample to test the null and alternative hypotheses , where the null hypothesis typically represents equality between population parameters​​.
• The null hypothesis (H0) assumes no event occurrence and is critical unless rejected, while the alternate hypothesis (H1) is its logical opposite and is considered upon the rejection of H0​​.
• The p-value is a crucial metric in hypothesis testing, indicating the likelihood of an observed difference occurring by chance; a lower p-value suggests a higher probability of the alternate hypothesis being true​​.
• Hypothesis testing is significant in research methodology as it provides evidence-based conclusions , supports decision-making , adds rigor and validity , and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in various fields​​.

Hypothesis testing in R is a fundamental skill for programmers and developers looking to analyze and interpret data effectively. This article guides you through the essential steps and techniques, using R's robust statistical tools. Whether you're new to R or seeking to refine your data analysis skills, these insights will enhance your ability to make data-driven decisions.

Setting Up Your R Environment

Formulating and testing your hypothesis, interpreting test results, frequently asked questions.

Before diving into hypothesis testing, ensure you have R and RStudio installed. R is the programming language used for statistical computing, while RStudio provides an integrated development environment (IDE) to work with R. Download R from CRAN and RStudio from RStudio's website.

Configuring Your Workspace

Installing necessary packages, loading data into r, exploratory data analysis, basic data manipulation.

After installation, open RStudio and set up your workspace. This involves organizing your scripts, data files, and outputs. Use setwd() to define your working directory:

R's functionality is extended through packages. For hypothesis testing, packages like ggplot2 for data visualization and stats for statistical functions are essential. Install packages using install.packages() :

After installation, load them into your session using library() :

Data can be loaded into R using various functions depending on the file format. For a CSV file, use read.csv() :

Before hypothesis testing, it's crucial to understand your data. Use summary functions and visualization to explore:

Data often requires cleaning and manipulation. Functions like subset() and transform() are useful:

These commands help in refining your dataset, making it ready for hypothesis testing.

The first step in hypothesis testing is to Formulate a Clear Hypothesis . This typically involves stating a null hypothesis (H0) that indicates no effect or no difference, and an alternative hypothesis (H1) that suggests the presence of an effect or a difference.

Null And Alternative Hypothesis

Choosing the right test, t-test example, interpreting the results, analyzing the output, visualizing the data.

For example, if you're testing whether a new programming tool improves efficiency:

• H0: The tool does not improve efficiency.
• H1: The tool improves efficiency.

Selecting an appropriate statistical test is crucial. The choice depends on your data type and the nature of your hypothesis. Common tests include t-tests, chi-square tests, and ANOVA.

If you're comparing means between two groups, a t-test is appropriate. In R, use t.test() :

The output of t.test() includes the P-Value , which helps determine the significance of your results. A p-value lower than your significance level (commonly 0.05) indicates that you can reject the null hypothesis.

After running t.test() , analyze the output:

• P-Value : Indicates the probability of observing your data if the null hypothesis is true.
• Confidence Interval : Provides a range in which the true mean difference likely lies.

Visualizing your data can provide additional insights. For instance, use ggplot2 to create a plot that compares the groups:

Understanding P-Values

Interpreting confidence intervals, effect size, calculating and interpreting effect size, creating a plot for results.

The P-Value is central in interpreting hypothesis test results. It represents the probability of observing your data, or something more extreme, if the null hypothesis is true. A small p-value (typically ≤ 0.05) suggests that the observed data is unlikely under the null hypothesis, leading to its rejection.

Evaluating Significance

When you run a test, R provides a p-value:

Confidence Intervals

Confidence Intervals offer a range of values within which the true parameter value lies with a certain level of confidence (usually 95%). Narrow intervals indicate more precise estimates.

From your test output, extract and examine the confidence interval:

While p-values indicate whether an effect exists, the Effect Size measures its magnitude. It's crucial for understanding the practical significance of your results.

For a t-test, you might calculate Cohen's d:

For instance, create a plot to visualize the difference:

What is Effect Size and Why is it Important?

Effect size is a quantitative measure of the magnitude of the experimental effect. Unlike p-values, which tell you if an effect exists, effect size tells you how large that effect is. It's important for understanding the practical significance of your results.

How Do I Interpret a Confidence Interval?

A confidence interval gives a range of values within which the true value is likely to lie. For example, a 95% confidence interval means that if the same study were repeated many times, 95% of the intervals would contain the true value.

What Does 'Rejecting the Null Hypothesis' Mean in Practical Terms?

Rejecting the null hypothesis suggests that there is enough statistical evidence to support the alternative hypothesis. In practical terms, it means that the observed effect or difference is unlikely to be due to chance.

Can I Perform Hypothesis Testing on Non-Numeric Data?

Yes, you can perform hypothesis testing on non-numeric (categorical) data. Tests like the Chi-Square test are designed for categorical data and can test hypotheses about proportions or frequencies.

Let’s test your knowledge!

What is the function used in R to perform a t-test?

Continue learning with these 'programming' guides.

• How To Debug In R: Effective Strategies For Developers
• How To Use R For Simulation: Effective Strategies And Techniques
• How To Install R Packages: Steps For Efficient Integration
• How To Import Data In R: Essential Steps For Efficient Data Analysis
• How To Clean Data In R: Essential Techniques For Effective Data Management

Subscribe to our newsletter

Subscribe to be notified of new content on marketsplash..

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, impact of industrial policy on urban green innovation: empirical evidence of china’s national high-tech zones based on double machine learning.

• College of Economics and Management, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan, China

Effective industrial policies need to be implemented, particularly aligning with environmental protection goals to drive the high-quality growth of China’s economy in the new era. Setting up national high-tech zones falls under the purview of both regional and industrial policies. Using panel data from 163 prefecture-level cities in China from 2007 to 2019, this paper empirically analyzes the impact of national high-tech zones on the level of urban green innovation and its underlying mechanisms. It utilizes the national high-tech zones as a quasi-natural experiment and employs a double machine learning model. The study findings reveal that the policy for national high-tech zones greatly enhances urban green innovation. This conclusion remains consistent even after adjusting the measurement method, empirical samples, and controlling for other policy interferences. The findings from the heterogeneity analysis reveal that the impact of the national high-tech zone policy on green innovation exhibits significant regional heterogeneity, with a particularly significant effect in the central and western regions. Among cities, there is a notable push for green innovation levels in second-tier, third-tier, and fourth-tier cities. The moderating effect results indicate that, at the current stage of development, transportation infrastructure primarily exerts a negative moderating effect on how the national high-tech zone policy impacts the level of urban green innovation. This research provides robust empirical evidence for informing the optimization of the industrial policy of China and the establishment of a future ecological civilization system.

1 Introduction

The Chinese economy currently focuses on high-quality development rather than quick growth. The traditional demographic and resource advantages gradually diminish, making the earlier crude development model reliant on excessive resource input and consumption unsustainable. Simultaneously, resource impoverishment, environmental pollution, and carbon emissions are growing more severe ( Wang F. et al., 2022 ). Consequently, pursuing a mutually beneficial equilibrium between the economy and the environment has emerged as a critical concern in China’s economic growth. Green innovation, the integration of innovation with sustainability development ideas, is progressively gaining significance within the framework of reshaping China’s economic development strategy and addressing the challenges associated with resource and environmental limitations. In light of the present circumstances, and with the objectives outlined in the “3060 Plan” for carbon peak and carbon neutral, the pursuit of a green and innovative development trajectory, emphasizing heightened innovation alongside environ-mental preservation, has emerged as a pivotal concern within the context of China’s contemporary economic progress.

Industrial policy is pivotal in government intervention within market-driven resource allocation and correcting structural disparities. The government orchestrates this initiative to bolster industrial expansion and operational effectiveness. In contrast to Western industrial policies, those in China are predominantly crafted within the administrative framework and promulgated through administrative regulations. Over an extended period, numerous industrial policies have been devised in response to regional disparities in industrial development. These policies aim to identify new growth opportunities in diverse regions, focusing on optimizing and upgrading industrial structures. These strategies have been implemented at various administrative levels, from the central government to local authorities ( Sun and Sun, 2015 ). As a distinctive regional economic policy in China, the national high-tech zone represents one of the foremost supportive measures a city can acquire at the national level. Its crucial role involves facilitating the dissemination and advancement of regional economic growth. Over more than three decades, it has evolved into the primary platform through which China executes its strategy of concentrating on high-tech industries and fostering development driven by innovation. Concurrently, the national high-tech zone, operating as a geographically focused policy customized for a specific region ( Cao, 2019 ), enhances the precision of policy support for the industries under its purview, covering a more limited range of municipalities, counties, and regions. Contrasting with conventional regional industrial policies, the industry-focused policy within national high-tech zones prioritizes comprehensive resource allocation advice and economic foundations to maximize synergy and promote the long-term sustainable growth of the regional economy, and this represents a significant paradigm shift in location-based policies within the framework of carrying out the new development idea. Its inception embodies a combination of central authorization, high-level strategic planning, local grassroots decision-making, and innovative system development. In recent years, driven by the objective of dual carbon, national high-tech have proactively promoted environmentally friendly innovation. Nevertheless, given the proliferation of new industrial policies and the escalating complexity of the policy framework, has the setting up of national high-tech zones genuinely elevated the level of urban green innovation in contrast to conventional regional industrial policies? What are the underlying mechanisms? Simultaneously, concerning the variations among different cities, have the industrial policy tools within the national high-tech zones been employed judiciously and adaptable? What are the concrete practical outcomes? Investigating these matters has emerged as a significant subject requiring resolution by government, industry and academia.

2 Literature review and research hypothesis

2.1 literature review.

When considering industrial policy, the setting up national high-tech zones embodies the intersection of regional and industrial policies. Domestic and international academic research concerning setting up national high-tech zones primarily centers on economic activities and innovation. Notably, the economic impact of national high-tech zones encompasses a wide range of factors, including their influence on total factor productivity ( Tan and Zhang, 2018 ; Wang and Liu, 2023 ), foreign trade ( Alder et al., 2016 ), industrial structure upgrades ( Yuan and Zhu, 2018 ), and economic growth ( Liu and Zhao, 2015 ; Huang and Fernández-Maldonado, 2016 ; Wang Z. et al., 2022 ). Regarding innovation, numerous researchers have confirmed the positive effects of national high-tech zones on company innovation ( Vásquez-Urriago et al., 2014 ; Díez-Vial and Fernández-Olmos, 2017 ; Wang and Xu, 2020 ); Nevertheless, a few scholars have disagreed on this matter ( Hong et al., 2016 ; Sosnovskikh, 2017 ). In general, the consensus among scholars is that setting up high-tech national zones fosters regional innovation significantly. This consensus is supported by various aspects of innovation, including innovation efficiency ( Park and Lee, 2004 ; Chandrashekar and Bala Subrahmanya, 2017 ), agglomeration effect ( De Beule and Van Beveren, 2012 ), innovation capability ( Yang and Guo, 2020 ), among other relevant dimensions. The existing literature predominantly delves into the correlation between the setting up of national high-tech zones, innovation, and economic significance. However, the rise of digital economic developments, notably industrial digitization, has accentuated the limitations of the traditional innovation paradigm. These shortcomings, such as the inadequate exploration of the social importance and sustainability of innovation, have become apparent in recent years. As the primary driver of sustainable development, green innovation represents a potent avenue for achieving economic benefits and environmental value ( Weber et al., 2014 ). Its distinctiveness from other innovation forms lies in its potential to facilitate the transformation of development modes, reshape economic structures, and address pollution prevention and control challenges. However, in the context of green innovation, based on the double-difference approach, Wang et al. (2020) has pointed out that national high-tech zones enhance the effectiveness of urban green innovation, but this is only significant in the eastern region.

Furthermore, scholars have also explored the mechanisms underlying the innovation effects of national high-tech. For example, Cattapan et al. (2012) focused on science parks in Italy. They found that green innovation represents a potent avenue for achieving economic benefits as the primary driver of sustainable development, and environmental value technology transfer services positively influence product innovation. Albahari et al. (2017) confirmed that higher education institutions’ involvement in advancing corporate innovation within technology and science parks has a beneficial moderating effect. Using the moderating effect of spatial agglomeration as a basis, Li WH. et al. (2022) found that industrial agglomeration has a significantly unfavorable moderating influence on the effectiveness of performance transformation in national high-tech zones. Multiple studies have examined the national high-tech zone industrial policy’s regulatory framework and urban innovation. However, in the age of rapidly expanding new infrastructure, infrastructure construction is concentrated on information technologies like blockchain, big data, cloud computing, artificial intelligence, and the Internet; Further research is needed to explore whether traditional infrastructure, particularly transportation infrastructure, can promote urban green innovation. Transportation infrastructure has consistently been vital in fostering economic expansion, integrating regional resources, and facilitating coordinated development ( Behrens et al., 2007 ; Zhang et al., 2018 ; Pokharel et al., 2021 ). Therefore, it is necessary to investigate whether transportation infrastructure can continue encouraging innovative urban green practices in the digital economy.

In summary, the existing literature has extensively examined the influence of national high-tech zones on economic growth and innovation from various levels and perspectives, establishing a solid foundation and offering valuable research insights for this study. Nonetheless, previous studies frequently overlooked the impact of national high-tech zones on urban green innovation levels, and a subsequent series of work in this paper aims to address this issue. Further exploration and expansion are needed to understand the industrial policy framework’s strategy for relating national high-tech zones to urban green innovation. Furthermore, there is a need for further improvement and refinement of the research model and methodology. Based on these, this paper aims to discuss the industrial policy effects of national high-tech zones from the perspective of urban green innovation to enrich and expand the existing research.

In contrast to earlier research, the marginal contribution of this paper is organized into three dimensions: 1) Most scholars have primarily focused on the effects of national high-tech zones on economic activity and innovation, with less emphasis on green innovation and rare studies according to the level of green innovation perspective. The study on national high-tech zones as an industrial policy that has already been done is enhanced by this work. 2) Regarding the research methodology, the Double Machine Learning (DML) approach is used to evaluate the policy effects of national high-tech zones, leveraging the advantages of machine learning algorithms for high-dimensional and non-parametric prediction. This approach circumvents the problems of model setting bias and the “curse of dimensionality” encountered in traditional econometric models ( Chernozhukov et al., 2018 ), enhancing the credibility of the research findings. 3) By introducing transportation infrastructure as a moderator variable, this study investigates the underlying mechanism of national high-tech zones on urban green innovation, offering suggestions for maximizing the influence of these zones on policy.

2.2 Theoretical analysis and hypotheses

2.2.1 national high-tech zones’ industrial policies and urban green innovation.

As one of the ways to land industrial policies at the national level, national high-tech zones serve as effective driving forces for enhancing China’s ability to innovate regionally and its contribution to economic growth ( Xu et al., 2022 ). Green innovation is a novel form of innovation activity that harmoniously balances the competing goals of environmental preservation and technological advancement, facilitating the superior expansion of the economy by alleviating the strain on resources and the environment ( Li, 2015 ). National high-tech zones mainly impact urban green innovation through three main aspects. Firstly, based on innovation compensation effects, national high-tech zones, established based on the government’s strategic planning, receive special treatment in areas such as land, taxation, financing, credit, and more, serving as pioneering special zones and experimental fields established by the government to promote high-quality regional development. When the government offers R&D subsidies to enterprises engaged in green innovation activities within the zones, enterprises are inclined to respond positively to the government’s policy support and enhance their level of green innovation as a means of seeking external legitimacy ( Fang et al., 2021 ), thereby contributing to the advancement of urban green innovation. Secondly, based on the industrial restructuring effect, strict regulation of businesses with high emissions, high energy consumption, and high pollution levels is another aspect of implementing the national high-tech zone program. Consequently, businesses with significant emissions and energy consumption are required to optimize their industrial structure to access various benefits within the park, resulting in the gradual transformation and upgrading of high-energy-consumption industries towards green practices, thereby further contributing to regional green innovation. Based on Porter’s hypothesis, the green and low-carbon requirements of the park policy increase the production costs for polluting industries, prompting polluting enterprises to upgrade their existing technology and adopt green innovation practices. Lastly, based on the theory of industrial agglomeration, the national high-tech zones’ industrial policy facilitates the concentration of innovative talents to a certain extent, resulting in intensified competition in the green innovation market. Increased competition fosters the sharing of knowledge, technology, and talent, stimulating a market environment where the survival of the fittest prevails ( Melitz and Ottaviano, 2008 ). These increase the effectiveness of urban green innovation, helping to propel urban green innovation forward. Furthermore, the infrastructure development within the national high-tech zones establishes a favorable physical environment for enterprises to engage in creative endeavors. Also, it enables the influx of high-quality innovation capital from foreign sources, complementing the inherent characteristics of national high-tech zones that attract such capital and concentrate green innovation resources, ultimately resulting in both environmental and economic benefits. Based on the above analysis, Hypothesis 1 is proposed:

Hypothesis 1. Implementing industrial policies in national high-tech zones enhances levels of urban green innovation.

2.2.2 Heterogeneity analysis

Given the variations in economic foundations, industrial statuses, and population distributions across different regions, development strategies in different regions are also influenced by these variations ( Chen and Zheng, 2008 ). Theoretically, when using administrative boundaries or geographic locations as benchmarks, the impact of national high-tech zone industrial policy on urban green innovation should be achieved through strategies like aligning with the region’s existing industrial structure. Compared to the western and central regions, the eastern region exhibits more incredible innovation and dynamism due to advantages such as a developed economy, good infrastructure, advanced management concepts, and technologies, combined with a relatively high initial level of green innovation factor endowment. Considering the diminishing marginal effect principle of green innovation, the industrial policy implementation in national high-tech zones favors an “icing on the cake” approach in the eastern region, contrasting with a “send carbon in the snow” approach in the central and western regions. In other words, the economic benefits of national high-tech zones for promoting urban green innovation may need to be more robust than their impact on the central and western regions. Literature confirms that establishing national high-tech zones yields a more beneficial technology agglomeration effect in the less developed central and western regions ( Liu and Zhao, 2015 ), leading to a more substantial impact on enhancing the level of urban green innovation.

Moreover, local governments consider economic development, industrial structure, and infrastructure levels when establishing national high-tech zones. These factors serve as the foundation for regional classification to address variations in regional quality and to compensate for gaps in theoretical research on the link between national high-tech zone industrial policy implementation and urban green innovation. Consequently, the execution of industrial policies in national high-tech zones relies on other vital factors influencing urban green innovation. Significant variations exist in economic development and infrastructure levels among cities of different grades ( Luo and Wang, 2023 ). Generally, cities with higher rankings exhibit strong economic growth and infrastructure, contrasting those with lower rankings. Consequently, the effect of establishing a national high-tech zone on green innovation may vary across different city grades. Thus, considering the disparities across city rankings, we delve deeper into identifying the underlying reasons for regional diversity in the green innovation outcomes of industrial policies implemented in national high-tech zones based on city grades. Based on the above analysis, Hypothesis 2 is proposed:

Hypothesis 2. There is regional heterogeneity and city-level heterogeneity in the impact of national high-tech zone policies on the level of urban green innovation.

2.2.3 The moderating effect of transportation infrastructure

Implementing industrial policies and facilitating the flow of innovation factors are closely intertwined with the role of transport infrastructure as carriers and linkages. Generally, enhanced transportation infrastructure facilitates the absorption of local factors and improves resource allocation efficiency, thereby influencing the spatial redistribution of production factors like labor, resources, and technology across cities. Enhanced transportation infrastructure fosters the development of more robust and advanced innovation networks ( Fritsch and Slavtchev, 2011 ). Banister and Berechman (2001) highlighted that transportation infrastructure exhibits network properties that are fundamental to its agglomeration or diffusion effects. From this perspective, robust infrastructure impacts various economic activities, including interregional labor mobility, factor agglomeration, and knowledge exchange among firms, thereby expediting the spillover effects of green technological innovations ( Yu et al., 2013 ). In turn, this could positively moderate the influence of national hi-tech zone policies on green innovation. On the other hand, while transportation infrastructure facilitates the growth of national high-tech zone policies, it also brings negative impacts, including high pollution, emissions, and ecological landscape fragmentation. Improving transportation infrastructure can also lead to the “relative congestion effect” in national high-tech zones. This phenomenon, observed in specific regions, refers to the excessive concentration of similar enterprises across different links of the same industrial chain, which exacerbates the competition for innovation resources among enterprises, making it challenging for enterprises in the region to allocate their limited innovation resources to technological research and development activities ( Li et al., 2015 ). As a result, there needs to be a higher green innovation level. Therefore, the impact of transportation infrastructure in the current stage of development will be more complex. When the level of transport infrastructure is moderate, adequate transport infrastructure supports the promotion of urban green innovation through national high-tech zone policies. However, the impact of transport infrastructure regulation may be harmful. Based on the above analysis, Hypothesis 3 is proposed:

Hypothesis 3. Transportation infrastructure moderates the relationship between national high-tech zones and levels of urban green invention.

3 Research design

3.1 model setting.

This research explores the impact of industrial policies of national high-tech zones on the level of urban green innovation. Many related studies utilize traditional causal inference models to assess the impact of these policies. However, these models have several limitations in their application. For instance, the commonly used double-difference model in the parallel trend test has stringent requirements for the sample data. Although the synthetic control approach can create a virtual control group that meets parallel trends’ needs, it is limited to addressing the ‘one-to-many’ problem and requires excluding groups with extreme values. The selection of matching variables in propensity score matching is subjective, among other limitations ( Zhang and Li, 2023 ). To address the limitations of conventional causal inference models, scholars have started to explore applying machine learning to infer causality ( Chernozhukov et al., 2018 ; Knittel and Stolper, 2021 ). Machine learning algorithms excel at an impartial assessment of the effect on the intended target variable for making accurate predictions.

In contrast to traditional machine learning algorithms, the formal proposal of DML was made in 2018 ( Chernozhukov et al., 2018 ). This approach offers a more robust approach to causal inference by mitigating bias through the incorporation of residual modeling. Currently, some scholars utilize DML to assess causality in economic phenomena. For instance, Hull and Grodecka-Messi (2022) examined the effects of local taxation, crime, education, and public services on migration using DML in the context of Swedish cities between 2010 and 2016. These existing research findings serve as valuable references for this study. Compared to traditional causal inference models, DML offers distinct advantages in variable selection and model estimation ( Zhang and Li, 2023 ). However, in promoting urban green innovation in China, there is a high probability of non-linear relationships between variables, and the traditional linear regression model may lead to bias and errors. Moreover, the double machine learning model can effectively avoid problems such as setting bias. Based on this, the present study employs a DML model to evaluate the policy implications of establishing a national high-tech zone.

3.1.1 Double machine learning framework

Prior to applying the DML algorithm, this paper refers to the practice of Chernozhukov et al. (2018) to construct a partially linear DML model, as depicted in Eq. 1 below:

where i represents the city, t represents the year, and l n G I i t represents the explained variable, which in this paper is the green innovation level of the city. Z o n e i t represents the disposition variable, which in this case is a national high-tech zone’s policy variable. It takes a value of 1 after the implementation of the pilot and 0 otherwise. θ 0 is the disposal factor that is the focus of this paper. X i t represents the set of high-dimensional control variables. Machine learning algorithms are utilized to estimate the specific form of g ^ X i t , whereas U i t , which has a conditional mean of 0, stands for the error term. n represents the sample size. Direct estimation of Eq. 1 provides an estimate for the coefficient of dispositions.

We can further explore the estimation bias by combining Eqs 1 , 2 as depicted in Eq. ( 3 ) below:

where a = 1 n ∑ i ∈ I , t ∈ T   Z o n e i t 2 − 1 1 n ∑ i ∈ I , t ∈ T   Z o n e i t U i t , by a normal distribution having 0 as the mean, b = 1 n ∑ i ∈ I , t ∈ T   Z o n e i t 2 − 1 1 n ∑ i ∈ I , t ∈ T   Z o n e i t g X i t − g ^ X i t . It is important to note that DML utilizes machine learning and a regularization algorithm to estimate a specific functional form g ^ X i t . The introduction of “canonical bias” is inevitable as it prevents the estimates from having excessive variance while maintaining their unbiasedness. Specifically, the convergence of g ^ X i t to g X i t , n −φg > n −1/2 , as n tends to infinity, b also tends to infinity, θ ^ 0 is difficult to converge to θ 0 . To expedite convergence and ensure unbiasedness of the disposal coefficient estimates with small samples, an auxiliary regression is constructed as follows:

where m X i t represents the disposition variable’s regression function on the high-dimensional control variable, this function also requires estimation using a machine learning algorithm in the specific form of m ^ X i t . Additionally, V i t represents the error term with a 0 conditional mean.

3.1.2 The test of the mediating effect within the DML framework

This study investigates how the national high-tech zone industrial policy influences the urban green innovation. It incorporates moderating variables within the DML framework, drawing on the testing procedure outlined by Jiang (2022) , and integrates it with the practice of He et al. (2022) , as outlined below:

Equation 5 is based on Eq. 1 with the addition of variables l n t r a i t and Z o n e i t * l n t r a i t .Where l n t r a i t represents the moderating variable, which in this paper is the transportation infrastructure. Z o n e i t * l n t r a i t represents the interaction term of the moderating variable and the disposition variable. The variables l n t r a i t and Z o n e i t are added to the high-dimensional control variables X i t , and the rest of the variables in Eq. 5 are identical to Eq. 1 . θ 1 represents the disposal factor to focus on.

3.2 Variable selection

3.2.1 dependent variable: level of urban green innovation (lngi).

Nowadays, many academics use indicators like the number of applications for patents or authorizations to assess the degree of urban innovation. To be more precise, the quantity of patent applications is a measure of technological innovation effort, while the number of patents authorized undergoes strict auditing and can provide a more direct reflection of the achievements and capacity of scientific and technological innovation. Thus, this paper refers to the studies of Zhou and Shen (2020) and Li X. et al. (2022) to utilize the count of authorized green invention patents in each prefecture-level city to indicate the level of green innovation. For the empirical study, the count of authorized green patents plus 1 is transformed using logarithm.

3.2.2 Disposal variable: dummy variables for national high-tech zones (Zone)

The national high-tech zone dummy variable’s value correlates with the city in which it is located and the list of national high-tech zones released by China’s Ministry of Science and Technology. If a national high-tech zone was established in the city by 2017, the value is set to 1 for the year the high-tech zone is established and subsequent years. Otherwise, it is set to 0.

3.2.3 Moderating variable: transportation infrastructure (lntra)

Previous studies have shown that China’s highway freight transport comprises 75% of the total freight transport ( Li and Tang, 2015 ). Highway transportation infrastructure has a significant influence on the evolution of the Chinese economy. The development and improvement of highway infrastructure are crucial for modern transportation. This paper uses the research methods of Wu (2019) and uses the roadway mileage (measured in kilometers) to population as a measure of the quality of the transportation system.

3.2.4 Control variables

(1) Foreign direct investment (lnfdi): There is general agreement among academics that foreign direct investment (FDI) significantly influences urban green innovation, as FDI provides expertise in management, human resources, and cutting-edge industrial technology ( Luo et al., 2021 ). Thus, it is necessary to consider and control the level of FDI. This paper uses the ratio of foreign investment to the local GDP in a million yuan.

(2) Financial development level (lnfd): Innovation in science and technology is greatly aided by finance. For the green innovation-driven strategy to advance, it is imperative that funding for science and technology innovation be strengthened. The amount of capital raised for innovation is strongly impacted by the state of urban financial development ( Zhou and Du, 2021 ). Thus, this paper uses the loan balance to GDP ratio as an indicator.

(3) Human capital (lnhum): Highly skilled human capital is essential for cities to drive green innovation. Generally, highly qualified human capital significantly boosts green innovation ( Ansaris et al., 2016 ). Therefore, a measure was employed: the proportion of people in the city who had completed their bachelor’s degree or above.

(4) Industrial structure (lnind): Generally, the secondary industry in China is the primary source of pollution, and there is a significant impact of industrial structure on green innovation ( Qiu et al., 2023 ). The metric used in this paper is the secondary industry-to-GDP ratio for the area.

(5) Regional economic development level (lnagdp): A region’s level of economic growth is indicative of the material foundation for urban green innovation and in-fluences the growth of green innovation in the region ( Bo et al., 2020 ). This research uses the annual gross domestic product per capita as a measurement.

3.3 Data source

By 2017, China had developed 157 national high-tech zones in total. In conjunction with the study’s objectives, this study performs sample adjustments and a screening process. The study’s sample period spans from 2007 to 2019. 57 national high-tech zones that were created prior to 2000 are omitted to lessen the impact on the test results of towns having high-tech zones founded before 2007. Due to the limitations of high-tech areas in cities at the county level in promoting urban green innovation, 8 high-tech zones located in county-level cities are excluded. And 4 high-tech zones with missing severe data are excluded. Among the list of established national high-tech zones, 88 high-tech zones are distributed across 83 prefecture-level cities due to multiple districts within a single city. As a result, 83 cities are selected as the experimental group for this study. Additionally, a control group of 80 cities was selected from among those that did not have high-tech zones by the end of 2019, resulting in a final sample size of 163 cities. This paper collects green patent data for each city from the China Green Patent Statistical Report published by the State Intellectual Property Office. The author compiled the list of national high-tech zones and the starting year of their establishment on the official government website. In addition, the remaining data in this paper primarily originated from the China Urban Statistical Yearbook (2007–2019), the EPS database, and the official websites of the respective city’s Bureau of Statistics. Missing values were addressed through linear interpolation. To address heteroskedasticity in the model, the study logarithmically transforms the variables, excluding the disposal variable. Table 1 shows the descriptive analysis of the variables.

Table 1 . Descriptive analysis.

4 Empirical analysis

4.1 national high-tech zones’ policy effects on urban green innovation.

This study utilizes the DML model to estimate the impact of industrial policies implemented in national high-tech zones at the level of urban green innovation. Following the approach of Zhang and Li (2023) , the sample is split in a ratio of 1:4, and the random forest algorithm is used to perform predictions and combine Eq. ( 1 ) with Eq. ( 4 ) for the regression. Table 2 presents the results with and without controlling for time and city effects. The results indicate that the treatment effect sizes for these four columns are 0.376, 0.293, 0.396, and 0.268, correspondingly, each of which was significant at a 1% level. Thus, Hypothesis 1 is supported.

Table 2 . Benchmark regression results.

4.2 Robustness tests

4.2.1 eliminate the influence of extreme values.

To reduce the impact of extreme values on the estimation outcomes, all variables on the benchmark regression, excluding the disposal variable, undergo a shrinkage process based on the upper and lower 1% and 5% quantiles. Values lower than the lowest and higher than the highest quantile are replaced accordingly. Regression analyses are conducted. Table 3 demonstrates that removing outliers did not substantially alter the findings of this study.

Table 3 . Extreme values removal results.

4.2.2 Considering province-time interaction fixed effects

Since provinces are critical administrative units in the governance system of the Chinese government, cities within the same province often share similarities in policy environment and location characteristics. Therefore, to account for the influence of temporal changes across different provinces, this study incorporates province-time interaction fixed effects based on the benchmark regression. Table 4 presents the individual regression results. Based on the regression results, after accounting for the correlation between different city characteristics within the same province, national high-tech zone policies continue to significantly influence urban green innovation, even at the 1% level.

Table 4 . The addition of province and time fixed effects interaction terms.

4.2.3 Excluding other policy disturbances

When analyzing how national high-tech zones affect strategy for urban green innovation, it is susceptible to the influence of concurrent policies. This study accounts for other comparable policies during the same period to ensure an accurate estimation of the policy effect. Since 2007, national high-tech zone policies have been successively implemented, including the development of “smart cities.” Therefore, this study incorporates a policy dummy variable for “smart cities” in the benchmark regression. The specific regression findings are shown in Table 5 . After controlling for the impact of concurrent policies, the importance of national high-tech zones’ policy impact remains consistent.

Table 5 . Results of removing the impact of parallel policies.

4.2.4 Resetting the DML model

To mitigate the potential bias introduced by the settings in the DML model on the conclusions, the purpose of this study is to assess the conclusions’ robustness using the following methods. First, the sample split ratio of the DML model is adjusted from 1:4 to 1:2 to examine the potential impact of the sample split ratio on the conclusions of this study. Second, the machine learning algorithm is substituted, replacing the random forest algorithm, which has been utilized as a prediction algorithm, with lasso regression, gradient boosting, and neural networks to investigate the potential influence of prediction algorithms on the conclusions of this study. Third, regarding benchmark regression, additional linear models were constructed and analyzed using DML, which involves subjective decisions regarding model form selection. Therefore, DML was employed to construct more comprehensive interactive models, aiming to assess the influence of model settings on the conclusions of this study. The main and auxiliary regressions utilized for the analysis were modified as follows:

Combining Eqs ( 7 ), ( 8 ) for the regression, the interactive model yielded estimated coefficients for the disposition effect:

The results of Eq. ( 9 ) are shown in column (5) of Table 6 . And all the regression results obtained from the modified DML model are presented in Table 6 .

Table 6 . Results of resetting the DML model.

The findings indicate that the sample split ratio in the DML model, the prediction algorithm used, or the model estimation approach does not impact the conclusion that the national high-tech zone policy raises urban areas’ level of green innovation. These factors only modify the magnitude of the policy effect to some degree.

4.3 Heterogeneity analysis

4.3.1 regional heterogeneity.

The sample cities were further divided into the east, central, and west regions based on the three major economic subregions to examine regional variations in national high-tech zone policies ' effects on urban green innovation, with the results presented in Table 7 . National high-tech zone policies do not statistically significantly affect urban green innovation in the eastern region. However, they have a considerable beneficial influence in the central and western areas. The lack of statistical significance may be explained by the possibility that the setting up of national high-tech zones in the eastern region will provide obstacles to the growth of urban green innovation, such as resource strain and environmental pollution. Given the central and western regions’ relatively underdeveloped economic status and industrial structure, coupled with the preceding theoretical analysis, establishing national high-tech zones is a crucial catalyst, significantly boosting urban green innovation levels. Furthermore, the central government emphasizes that setting high-tech national zones should consider regional resource endowments and local conditions, implementing tailored policies. The central and western regions possess unique geographic locations and natural conditions that make them well-suited for developing solar energy, wind energy, and other forms of green energy. Compared to the central region, the national high-tech zone initiative has a more pronounced impact on promoting urban green innovation in the western region. While further optimization is needed for the western region’s urban innovation environment, the policy on national high-tech zones has a more substantial incentive effect in this region due to its more significant development potential, positive transformation of industrial structure, and increased policy support from the state, including the development strategy for the western region.

Table 7 . Heterogeneity test results for different regions.

4.3.2 Urban hierarchical heterogeneity

The New Tier 1 Cities Institute’s ‘2020 City Business Charm Ranking’ is the basis for this study, with the sample cities categorized into Tier 1 (New Tier 1), Tier 2, Tier 3, Tier 4, and Tier 5. Table 8 presents the regression findings for each of the groups.

Table 8 . Heterogeneity test results for different classes of cities.

The results in Table 8 reveal significant heterogeneity at the city level regarding national high-tech zones’ effects on urban green innovation, confirming Hypothesis 2 . In particular, the coefficients for the first-tier cities are not statistically significant due to the small sample size, and the same applies to the fifth-tier cities. This could be attributed to the relatively weak economy and infrastructure development issues in the fifth-tier cities. Additionally, due to their limited level of development, the fifth-tier cities may have a relatively homogeneous industrial structure, with a dominance of traditional industries or agriculture and a need for a more diversified industrial layout. National high-tech zones have not greatly aided the development of green innovation in these cities. In contrast, national high-tech zone policies in second-tier, third-tier, and fourth-tier cities have a noteworthy favorable impact on green innovation, indicating their favorable influence on enhancing green innovation in these cities. Despite the lower level of economic development in fourth-tier cities compared to second-tier and third-tier cities, the fourth-tier cities’ national high-tech zones have the most pronounced impact on promoting green innovation. This could be attributed to the ongoing transformation of industries in fourth-tier cities, which are still in the technology diffusion and imitation stage, allowing these cities’ national high-tech zones to maintain a high marginal effect. Thus, Hypothesis 2 is supported.

5 Further analysis

According to the empirical findings, setting high-tech national zones significantly raises the bar for urban green innovation. Therefore, it is essential to understand the underlying factors and mechanisms that contribute to the positive correlation. This paper constructs a moderating effect test model using Eqs 5 , 6 and provides a detailed discussion by introducing transportation infrastructure as a moderating variable.

The empirical finding of the moderating impact of transportation infrastructure is shown in Table 9 . The dichotomous interaction term Zone*lntra is significantly negative at the 5% level, suggesting that the impact of national high-tech zone policies on the level of urban green innovation is negatively moderated by transportation infrastructure. This result deviates from the general expectation, but it aligns with the complexity of the role played by transportation infrastructure in the context of modern economic development, as discussed in the previous theoretical analysis. This could be attributed to the insufficient green innovation benefits generated by the policy on national high-tech zones at the current stage, which fails to compensate for the adverse effects of excessive resource consumption and environmental pollution caused by the construction of the zone. Furthermore, transportation infrastructure can lead to an excessive concentration of similar enterprises in the high-tech zones. This excessive concentration creates a relative crowding effect, intensifying competition among enterprises. It diminishes their inclination to engage in green innovation collaboration and investment and hinders their effective implementation of technological research and development activities. Moreover, the excessive clustering of similar enterprises implies a need for more diversity in green innovation activities among businesses located in national high-tech zones. This results in duplicated green innovation outputs and hinders the advancement of green innovation. Thus, Hypothesis 3 is supported.

Table 9 . Empirical results of moderating effects.

6 Conclusion and policy recommendations

6.1 conclusion.

Based on panel data from 163 prefecture-level cities in China from 2007 to 2019, the net effect of setting national high-tech zones on urban green innovation was analyzed using the double machine learning model. The results found that: firstly, the national high-tech zone policy significantly raises the degree of local green innovation, and these results remain robust even after accounting for various factors that could affect the estimation results. Secondly, in the central and western regions, the level of urban green innovation is positively impacted by the national high-tech zone policy; However, this impact is less significant in the eastern region. In the western region compared to the central region, the national high-tech zone initiative has a stronger impact on increasing the level of urban green innovation. Across different city levels, compared to second-tier and third-tier cities, the high-tech zone policy has a more substantial impact on increasing the level of green innovation in fourth-tier cities. Thirdly, based on the moderating effect mechanism test, the construction of transportation infrastructure weakens the promotional effect of national high-tech zones on urban green innovation.

6.2 Policy recommendations

In order that national high-tech zones can better promote China’s high-quality development, this paper proposes the following policy recommendations:

(1) Urban green innovation in China depends on accelerating the setting up of national high-tech zones and creating an atmosphere that supports innovation. Establishing national high-tech zones as testbeds for high-quality development and green innovation has significantly elevated urban green innovation. Thus, cities can efficiently foster urban green innovation by supporting the development of national high-tech zones. Cities that have already established national high-tech zones should further encourage enterprises within these zones to increase their investment in research and development. They should also proceed to foster the leadership of national high-tech zones for urban green innovation, assuming the role of pilot cities as models and leaders. Additionally, it is essential to establish mechanisms for cooperation and synergy between the pilot cities and their neighboring cities to promote collective green development in the region.

(2) Expanding the pilot program and implementing tailored policies based on local conditions are essential. Industrial policies about national high-tech zones have differing effects on urban green innovation. Regions should leverage their comparative advantages, consider urban development’s commonalities and unique aspects, and foster a stable and sustainable green innovation ecosystem. The western and central regions should prioritize constructing and enhancing new infrastructure and bolster support for the high-tech green industry. The western region should seize the opportunity presented by national policies that prioritize support, quicken the rate of environmental innovation, and progressively bridge the gap with the eastern and central regions in various aspects. Furthermore, second-tier, third-tier, and fourth-tier cities should enhance the advantages of national high-tech zone policies, further maintaining the high standard of green innovation and keeping green innovation at an elevated level. Regions facing challenges in green innovation, particularly fifth-tier cities, should learn from the development experiences of advanced regions with national high-tech zones to compensate for their deficiencies in green innovation.

(3) Highlighting the importance of transportation regulation and enhancing collaboration in green innovation is crucial. Firstly, transportation infrastructure should be maximized to strengthen coordination and cooperation among regions, facilitate the smooth movement of innovative talents across regions, and facilitate the rational sharing of innovative resources, collectively enhancing green innovation. Additionally, attention ought to be given to the industrial clustering effect of parks to prevent the wastage of resources and inefficiencies resulting from the excessive clustering of similar industries. Efforts should be focused on effectively harnessing the latent potential of crucial transportation infrastructure areas as long-term drivers of development, promptly mitigating the negative impact of transportation infrastructure construction, and gradually achieving the synergistic promotion of the setting up of national high-tech zones and the raising of urban levels of green innovation, among other overarching objectives.

6.3 Limitations and future research

Our study has some limitations because the research in this paper is conducted in the institutional context of China. For example, not all countries are suitable for implementing similar industrial policies to develop the economy while focusing on environmental protection. However, we recognize that this study is interesting and relevant, and it encourages us to focus more intensely on environmental protection from an industrial policy perspective. Moreover, this paper exhibits certain limitations in the research process. Firstly, the urban green innovation measurement index was developed using the quantity of green patent authorizations. Future studies could focus on green innovation processes, such as the quality of green patents granted. Secondly, the paper employs machine learning techniques for causal inference. Subsequent investigations could delve further into the potential applications of machine learning algorithms in environmental sciences to maximize the benefits of innovative research methodologies.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusion of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Author contributions

WC: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing–review and editing. YJ: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing. BT: Investigation, Project administration, Writing–review and editing.

The authors declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This research was supported by the Youth Fund for Humanities and Social Science research of Ministry of Education (20YJC790004).

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the editors and the reviewers for their insightful comments.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Albahari, A., Pérez-Canto, S., Barge-Gil, A., and Modrego, A. (2017). Technology parks versus science parks: does the university make the difference? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 116, 13–28. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.012

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Alder, S., Shao, L., and Zilibotti, F. (2016). Economic reforms and industrial policy in a panel of Chinese cities. J. Econ. Growth 21, 305–349. doi:10.1007/s10887-016-9131-x

Ansaris, M., Ashrafi, S., and Jebellie, H. (2016). The impact of human capital on green innovation. Industrial Manag. J. 8 (2), 141–162. doi:10.22059/imj.2016.60653

Banister, D., and Berechman, Y. (2001). Transport investment and the promotion of economic growth. J. Transp. Geogr. 9 (3), 209–218. doi:10.1016/s0966-6923(01)00013-8

Behrens, K., Lamorgese, A. R., Ottaviano, G. I., and Tabuchi, T. (2007). Changes in transport and non-transport costs: local vs global impacts in a spatial network. Regional Sci. Urban Econ. 37 (6), 625–648. doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2007.08.003

Bo, W., Yongzhong, Z., Lingshan, C., and Xing, Y. (2020). Urban green innovation level and decomposition of its determinants in China. Sci. Res. Manag. 41 (8), 123. doi:10.19571/j.cnki.1000-2995.2020.08.013

Cao, Q. F. (2019). The latest researches on place based policy and its implications for the construction of xiong’an national new district. Sci. Technol. Prog. Policy 36 (2), 36–43. (in Chinese).

Google Scholar

Cattapan, P., Passarelli, M., and Petrone, M. (2012). Brokerage and SME innovation: an analysis of the technology transfer service at area science park, Italy. Industry High. Educ. 26 (5), 381–391. doi:10.5367/ihe.2012.0119

Chandrashekar, D., and Bala Subrahmanya, M. H. (2017). Absorptive capacity as a determinant of innovation in SMEs: a study of Bengaluru high-tech manufacturing cluster. Small Enterp. Res. 24 (3), 290–315. doi:10.1080/13215906.2017.1396491

Chen, M., and Zheng, Y. (2008). China's regional disparity and its policy responses. China & World Econ. 16 (4), 16–32. doi:10.1111/j.1749-124x.2008.00119.x

Chernozhukov, V., Chetverikov, D., Demirer, M., Duflo, E., Hansen, C., Newey, W., et al. (2018). Double/debiased machine learning for treatment and structural parameters. Econ. J. 21 (1), C1–C68. doi:10.1111/ectj.12097

De Beule, F., and Van Beveren, I. (2012). Does firm agglomeration drive product innovation and renewal? An application for Belgium. Tijdschr. Econ. Soc. Geogr. 103 (4), 457–472. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9663.2012.00715.x

Díez-Vial, I., and Fernández-Olmos, M. (2017). The effect of science and technology parks on firms’ performance: how can firms benefit most under economic downturns? Technol. Analysis Strategic Manag. 29 (10), 1153–1166. doi:10.1080/09537325.2016.1274390

Fang, Z., Kong, X., Sensoy, A., Cui, X., and Cheng, F. (2021). Government’s awareness of environmental protection and corporate green innovation: a natural experiment from the new environmental protection law in China. Econ. Analysis Policy 70, 294–312. doi:10.1016/j.eap.2021.03.003

Fritsch, M., and Slavtchev, V. (2011). Determinants of the efficiency of regional innovation systems. Reg. Stud. 45 (7), 905–918. doi:10.1080/00343400802251494

He, J. A., Peng, F. P., and Xie, X. Y. (2022). Mixed-ownership reform, political connection and enterprise innovation: based on the double/unbiased machine learning method. Sci. Technol. Manag. Res. 42 (11), 116–126. (in Chinese).

Hong, J., Feng, B., Wu, Y., and Wang, L. (2016). Do government grants promote innovation efficiency in China's high-tech industries? Technovation 57, 4–13. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2016.06.001

Huang, W. J., and Fernández-Maldonado, A. M. (2016). High-tech development and spatial planning: comparing The Netherlands and Taiwan from an institutional perspective. Eur. Plan. Stud. 24 (9), 1662–1683. doi:10.1080/09654313.2016.1187717

Hull, I., and Grodecka-Messi, A. (2022). Measuring the impact of taxes and public services on property values: a double machine learning approach . arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.14751.

Jiang, T. (2022). Mediating effects and moderating effects in causal inference. China Ind. Econ. 5, 100–120. doi:10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.2022.05.005

Knittel, C. R., and Stolper, S. (2021). Machine learning about treatment effect heterogeneity: the case of household energy use. Nashv. TN 37203, 440–444. doi:10.1257/pandp.20211090

Li, H., and Tang, L. (2015). Transportation infrastructure investment, spatial spillover effect and enterprise inventory. Manag. World 4, 126–136. doi:10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2015.04.012

Li, W. H., Liu, F., and Liu, T. S. (2022a). Can national high-tech zones improve the urban innovation efficiency? an empirical test based on the effect of spatial agglomeration regulation. Manag. Rev. 34 (5), 93. doi:10.14120/j.cnki.cn11-5057/f.2022.05.007

Li, X. (2015). Analysis and outlook of the related researches on green innovation. R&D Manag. 27 (2), 1–11. doi:10.13581/j.cnki.rdm.2015.02.001

Li, X., Shao, X., Chang, T., and Albu, L. L. (2022b). Does digital finance promote the green innovation of China's listed companies? Energy Econ. 114, 106254. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106254

Li, X. P., Li, P., Lu, D. G., and Jiang, F. T. (2015). Economic agglomeration, selection effects and firm productivity. J. Manag. World 4, 25–37+51. (in Chinese). doi:10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2015.04.004

Liu, R. M., and Zhao, R. J. (2015). Does the national high-tech zone promote regional economic development? A verification based on differences-in-differences method. J. Manag. World 8, 30–38. doi:10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2015.08.005

Luo, R., and Wang, Q. M. (2023). Does the construction of national demonstration logistics park produce economic growth effect? Econ. Surv. 40 (1), 47–56. doi:10.15931/j.cnki.1006-1096.2023.01.015

Luo, Y., Salman, M., and Lu, Z. (2021). Heterogeneous impacts of environmental regulations and foreign direct investment on green innovation across different regions in China. Sci. total Environ. 759, 143744. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143744

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Melitz, M. J., and Ottaviano, G. I. (2008). Market size, trade, and productivity. Rev. Econ. Stud. 75 (1), 295–316. doi:10.1111/j.1467-937x.2007.00463.x

Park, S. C., and Lee, S. K. (2004). The regional innovation system in Sweden: a study of regional clusters for the development of high technology. Ai Soc. 18 (3), 276–292. doi:10.1007/s00146-003-0277-7

Pokharel, R., Bertolini, L., Te Brömmelstroet, M., and Acharya, S. R. (2021). Spatio-temporal evolution of cities and regional economic development in Nepal: does transport infrastructure matter? J. Transp. Geogr. 90, 102904. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102904

Qiu, Y., Wang, H., and Wu, J. (2023). Impact of industrial structure upgrading on green innovation: evidence from Chinese cities. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 30 (2), 3887–3900. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-22162-1

Sosnovskikh, S. (2017). Industrial clusters in Russia: the development of special economic zones and industrial parks. Russ. J. Econ. 3 (2), 174–199. doi:10.1016/j.ruje.2017.06.004

Sun, Z., and Sun, J. C. (2015). The effect of Chinese industrial policy: industrial upgrading or short-term economic growth. China Ind. Econ. 7, 52–67. (in Chinese). doi:10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.2015.07.004

Tan, J., and Zhang, J. (2018). Does national high-tech development zones promote the growth of urban total factor productivity? —based on" quasi-natural experiments" of 277 cities. Res. Econ. Manag. 39 (9), 75–90. doi:10.13502/j.cnki.issn1000-7636.2018.09.007

Vásquez-Urriago, Á. R., Barge-Gil, A., Rico, A. M., and Paraskevopoulou, E. (2014). The impact of science and technology parks on firms’ product innovation: empirical evidence from Spain. J. Evol. Econ. 24, 835–873. doi:10.1007/s00191-013-0337-1

Wang, F., Dong, M., Ren, J., Luo, S., Zhao, H., and Liu, J. (2022a). The impact of urban spatial structure on air pollution: empirical evidence from China. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 24, 5531–5550. doi:10.1007/s10668-021-01670-z

Wang, M., and Liu, X. (2023). The impact of the establishment of national high-tech zones on total factor productivity of Chinese enterprises. China Econ. 18 (3), 68–93. doi:10.19602/j.chinaeconomist.2023.05.04

Wang, Q., She, S., and Zeng, J. (2020). The mechanism and effect identification of the impact of National High-tech Zones on urban green innovation: based on a DID test. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 30 (02), 129–137.

Wang, W. S., and Xu, T. S. (2020). A research on the impact of national high-teach zone establishment on enterprise innovation performance. Econ. Surv. 37 (6), 76–87. doi:10.15931/j.cnki.1006-1096.20201010.001

Wang, Z., Yang, Y., and Wei, Y. (2022b). Has the construction of national high-tech zones promoted regional economic growth? empirical research from prefecture-level cities in China. Sustainability 14 (10), 6349. doi:10.3390/su14106349

Weber, M., Driessen, P. P., and Runhaar, H. A. (2014). Evaluating environmental policy instruments mixes; a methodology illustrated by noise policy in The Netherlands. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 57 (9), 1381–1397. doi:10.1080/09640568.2013.808609

Wu, Y. B. (2019). Does fiscal decentralization promote technological innovation. Mod. Econ. Sci. 41, 13–25.

Xu, S. D., Jiang, J., and Zheng, J. (2022). Has the establishment of national high-tech zones promoted industrial Co-Agglomeration? an empirical test based on difference in difference method. Inq. into Econ. Issues 11, 113–127. (in Chinese).

Yang, F., and Guo, G. (2020). Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation of innovation capability of Chinese national high-tech zone based on entropy weight—taking the northern coastal comprehensive economic zone as an example. J. Intelligent Fuzzy Syst. 38 (6), 7857–7864. doi:10.3233/jifs-179855

Yu, N., De Jong, M., Storm, S., and Mi, J. (2013). Spatial spillover effects of transport infrastructure: evidence from Chinese regions. J. Transp. Geogr. 28, 56–66. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.10.009

Yuan, H., and Zhu, C. L. (2018). Do national high-tech zones promote the transformation and upgrading of China’s industrial structure. China Ind. Econ. 8, 60–77. doi:10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.2018.08.004

Zhang, T., Chen, L., and Dong, Z. (2018). Highway construction, firm dynamics and regional economic efficiency. China Ind. Econ. 1, 79–99. doi:10.19581/j.cnki.ciejournal.20180115.003

Zhang, T., and Li, J. C. (2023). Network infrastructure, inclusive green growth, and regional inequality: from causal inference based on double machine learning. J. Quantitative Technol. Econ. 40 (4), 113–135. doi:10.13653/j.cnki.jqte.20230310.005

Zhou, L., and Shen, K. (2020). National city group construction and green innovation. China Popul. Resour. Environ. 30 (8), 92–99.

Zhou, X., and Du, J. (2021). Does environmental regulation induce improved financial development for green technological innovation in China? J. Environ. Manag. 300, 113685. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113685

Keywords: national high-tech zone, industrial policy, green innovation, heterogeneity analysis, moderating effect, double machine learning

Citation: Cao W, Jia Y and Tan B (2024) Impact of industrial policy on urban green innovation: empirical evidence of China’s national high-tech zones based on double machine learning. Front. Environ. Sci. 12:1369433. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2024.1369433

Received: 12 January 2024; Accepted: 15 March 2024; Published: 04 April 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Cao, Jia and Tan. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Yu Jia, [email protected]

CHEOPS detects a 'rainbow' on an exoplanet

The CHEOPS space telescope, whose scientific operations centre is based at the University of Geneva (UNIGE), is providing new information on the mysterious exoplanet WASP-76b. This ultra-hot giant is characterised by an asymmetry between the amount of light observed on its eastern terminator -- the fictitious line that separates its night side from its day side -- and that observed on its western terminator. This peculiarity is thought to be due to a ''glory'', a luminous phenomenon similar to a rainbow, which occurs if the light from the star -- the ''sun'' around which the exoplanet orbits -- is reflected by clouds made up of a perfectly uniform substance. If this hypothesis is confirmed, this would be the first detection of this phenomenon outside our solar system. This work, carried out in collaboration with the European Space Agency (ESA) and the University of Bern (UNIBE), is published in Astronomy & Astrophysics .

WASP-76b is an ultra-hot giant planet. Orbiting its host star twelve times closer than Mercury orbits our Sun, it receives more than 4,000 times the Sun's radiation on Earth. ''The exoplanet is 'inflated' by the intense radiation from its star. So, although it is 10% less massive than our cousin Jupiter, it is almost twice as big,'' explains Monika Lendl, assistant professor in the Department of Astronomy of the UNIGE Faculty of Science, and co-author of the study.

Since its discovery in 2013, WASP-76b has been the subject of intense scrutiny by astronomers. A strangely hellish picture has emerged. One side of the planet is always facing its star, reaching temperatures of 2,400 degrees Celsius. Elements that would form rocks on Earth melt and evaporate here, before condensing on the slightly cooler night side, creating clouds of iron that drip molten iron rain.

The crucial contribution of CHEOPS

One of the most disturbing observations for astronomers is the asymmetry between the planet's two terminators. The terminator is the imaginary line that separates the day and night sides of a planet. In the case of WASP-76b, the observations show an increase in the amount of light from the terminator to the east of the planet compared with the one to the west.

To solve this mystery, astronomers used no fewer than twenty-three observations with the CHEOPS space telescope, spread over three years. The ESA satellite, which is piloted by Switzerland and has its scientific operations centre at the UNIGE Department of Astronomy, observed numerous secondary eclipses of the planet (when it passes behind its star) and several phase curves (continuous observation during a complete revolution of the planet).

Combining these new data with those from other telescopes (TESS, Hubble and Spitzer), the astronomers were able to put forward a surprising hypothesis to explain the excess luminous flux on the eastern side of the planet: ''This unexpected glow could be caused by a strong, localised and anisotropic reflection -- i.e. one that depends on direction -- what we call a glory,'' explains Olivier Demangeon, researcher at the Instituto de Astrofísica e Ciências do Espaço in Portugal and lead author of the study.

A first outside our solar system

Glories are common phenomena on Earth. They have also been observed on Venus. The effect, similar to a rainbow, occurs when light is reflected by clouds made up of perfectly uniform droplets. In the case of Earth, the droplets are made out of water, but the nature of these droplets on WASP-76b remains mysterious. It could be iron, as this has already been detected in the planet's extremely hot atmosphere. The detection of this phenomenon on WASP-76b is the first of its kind outside our solar system.

''The reason why no such glory has ever been observed outside our solar system is that this phenomenon requires very specific conditions. First of all, the atmospheric particles must be almost perfectly spherical, completely uniform and sufficiently stable to be observed throughout a long time. These droplets have to be directly illuminated by the planet's host star, and the observer -- in this case CHEOPS -- must be in the right position,'' explains Olivier Demangeon.

Results to be confirmed

Further data will be needed to confirm with certainty that this intriguing excess of light on the eastern terminator of WASP-76b is a glory. This confirmation would attest to the presence of clouds made up of perfectly spherical droplets that have existed for at least three years, or that are constantly renewing themselves. For such clouds to persist, the temperature of the atmosphere would also have to be stable over time -- a fascinating and detailed insight into what could be happening on WASP-76b.

Detecting such tiny phenomena at such a great distance will enable scientists and engineers to identify others that are just as crucial. For example, the reflection of starlight off liquid lakes and oceans -- a necessary condition for habitability.

• Extrasolar Planets
• Solar System
• Space Telescopes
• Extrasolar planet
• Spitzer space telescope
• Blue supergiant star
• Space observatory

Story Source:

Materials provided by Université de Genève . Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference :

• O. D. S. Demangeon, P. E. Cubillos, V. Singh, T. G. Wilson, L. Carone, A. Bekkelien, A. Deline, D. Ehrenreich, P. F. L. Maxted, B.-O. Demory, T. Zingales, M. Lendl, A. Bonfanti, S. G. Sousa, A. Brandeker, Y. Alibert, R. Alonso, J. Asquier, T. Bárczy, D. Barrado Navascues, S. C. C. Barros, W. Baumjohann, M. Beck, T. Beck, W. Benz, N. Billot, F. Biondi, L. Borsato, Ch. Broeg, M. Buder, A. Collier Cameron, Sz. Csizmadia, M. B. Davies, M. Deleuil, L. Delrez, A. Erikson, A. Fortier, L. Fossati, M. Fridlund, D. Gandolfi, M. Gillon, M. Güdel, M. N. Günther, A. Heitzmann, Ch. Helling, S. Hoyer, K. G. Isaak, L. L. Kiss, K. W. F. Lam, J. Laskar, A. Lecavelier des Etangs, D. Magrin, M. Mecina, Ch. Mordasini, V. Nascimbeni, G. Olofsson, R. Ottensamer, I. Pagano, E. Pallé, G. Peter, G. Piotto, D. Pollacco, D. Queloz, R. Ragazzoni, N. Rando, H. Rauer, I. Ribas, M. Rieder, S. Salmon, N. C. Santos, G. Scandariato, D. Ségransan, A. E. Simon, A. M. S. Smith, M. Stalport, Gy. M. Szabó, N. Thomas, S. Udry, V. Van Grootel, J. Venturini, E. Villaver, N. A. Walton. Asymmetry in the atmosphere of the ultra-hot Jupiter WASP-76 b . Astronomy & Astrophysics , 2024; 684: A27 DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/202348270

Cite This Page :

Explore More

• 'Rainbow' Detected On an Exoplanet
• Spears and Throwing Sticks 300,000 Years Old
• High Carbon Impact of Tourism at Yellowstone
• Extreme Starburst Galaxy
• Asthma: Disease May Be Stoppable
• Stellar Collisions and Zombie-Like Survivors
• Tiny Robot Swarms Inspired by Herd Mentality
• How the Brain Regulates Emotions
• Evolution in Action? Nitrogen-Fixing Organelles
• Plastic-Free Vegan Leather That Dyes Itself

Trending Topics

Strange & offbeat.