Skip Nav
#
hypothesis

##
Additional Resources

## This article is a part of the guide:

❶Karl Popper , following others, has argued that a hypothesis must be falsifiable , and that one cannot regard a proposition or theory as scientific if it does not admit the possibility of being shown false.
## Navigation menu

## Main Topics

### Privacy Policy

### Privacy FAQs

### About Our Ads

### Cookie Info

According to Schick and Vaughn, [13] researchers weighing up alternative hypotheses may take into consideration:. A working hypothesis is a hypothesis that is provisionally accepted as a basis for further research [14] in the hope that a tenable theory will be produced, even if the hypothesis ultimately fails.

Working hypotheses are often used as a conceptual framework in qualitative research. The provisional nature of working hypotheses make them useful as an organizing device in applied research. Here they act like a useful guide to address problems that are still in a formative phase. In recent years, philosophers of science have tried to integrate the various approaches to evaluating hypotheses, and the scientific method in general, to form a more complete system that integrates the individual concerns of each approach.

Notably, Imre Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend , Karl Popper's colleague and student, respectively, have produced novel attempts at such a synthesis. Concepts in Hempel's deductive-nomological model play a key role in the development and testing of hypotheses. Most formal hypotheses connect concepts by specifying the expected relationships between propositions.

When a set of hypotheses are grouped together they become a type of conceptual framework. When a conceptual framework is complex and incorporates causality or explanation it is generally referred to as a theory. According to noted philosopher of science Carl Gustav Hempel "An adequate empirical interpretation turns a theoretical system into a testable theory: The hypothesis whose constituent terms have been interpreted become capable of test by reference to observable phenomena.

Frequently the interpreted hypothesis will be derivative hypotheses of the theory; but their confirmation or disconfirmation by empirical data will then immediately strengthen or weaken also the primitive hypotheses from which they were derived.

Hempel provides a useful metaphor that describes the relationship between a conceptual framework and the framework as it is observed and perhaps tested interpreted framework. These might be viewed as strings which are not part of the network but link certain points of the latter with specific places in the plane of observation. By virtue of those interpretative connections, the network can function as a scientific theory.

In "actual scientific practice the process of framing a theoretical structure and of interpreting it are not always sharply separated, since the intended interpretation usually guides the construction of the theoretician.

When a possible correlation or similar relation between phenomena is investigated, such as whether a proposed remedy is effective in treating a disease, the hypothesis that a relation exists cannot be examined the same way one might examine a proposed new law of nature. In such an investigation, if the tested remedy shows no effect in a few cases, these do not necessarily falsify the hypothesis. Instead, statistical tests are used to determine how likely it is that the overall effect would be observed if the hypothesized relation does not exist.

If that likelihood is sufficiently small e. Otherwise, any observed effect may be due to pure chance. In statistical hypothesis testing, two hypotheses are compared. These are called the null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis. The null hypothesis is the hypothesis that states that there is no relation between the phenomena whose relation is under investigation, or at least not of the form given by the alternative hypothesis.

The alternative hypothesis, as the name suggests, is the alternative to the null hypothesis: The alternative hypothesis may take several forms, depending on the nature of the hypothesized relation; in particular, it can be two-sided for example: Conventional significance levels for testing hypotheses acceptable probabilities of wrongly rejecting a true null hypothesis are.

Whether the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is accepted, must be determined in advance, before the observations are collected or inspected. If these criteria are determined later, when the data to be tested are already known, the test is invalid. The above procedure is actually dependent on the number of the participants units or sample size that is included in the study. For instance, the sample size may be too small to reject a null hypothesis and, therefore, it is recommended to specify the sample size from the beginning.

It is advisable to define a small, medium and large effect size for each of a number of important statistical tests which are used to test the hypotheses.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. For the hypotheses of a theorem, see Theorem. For other uses, see Hypothesis disambiguation. For the progressive metal album, see Hypothetical album. Axiom Bold hypothesis Case study Conjecture Explanandum Hypothesis theory — a research area in cognitive psychology Logical positivism Operationalization Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica — for Newton's position on hypotheses Reductionism Research design Sociology of scientific knowledge Theorem Thesis statement.

Retrieved 22 August First we guess it. Knorr , "Construction as existence proof in ancient geometry", p. Harcourt, Brace, and Company. Such guesses have been given the name conjectures or hypotheses. How to think about weird things: Shields , Hassan Tajalli Journal of Public Affairs Education. A Tool For Public Administration".

Research in Public Administration. Over-fishing affects the stocks of cod. If over-fishing is causing a decline in the numbers of Cod, reducing the amount of trawlers will increase cod stocks.

These are acceptable statements and they all give the researcher a focus for constructing a research experiment. Though the other one is perfectly acceptable, an ideal research hypothesis should contain a prediction, which is why the more formal ones are favored. A scientist who becomes fixated on proving a research hypothesis loses their impartiality and credibility. Statistical tests often uncover trends, but rarely give a clear-cut answer, with other factors often affecting the outcome and influencing the results.

Whilst gut instinct and logic tells us that fish stocks are affected by over fishing, it is not necessarily true and the researcher must consider that outcome. Perhaps environmental factors or pollution are causal effects influencing fish stocks. A hypothesis must be testable , taking into account current knowledge and techniques, and be realistic.

If the researcher does not have a multi-million dollar budget then there is no point in generating complicated hypotheses. A hypothesis must be verifiable by statistical and analytical means, to allow a verification or falsification. This means that the research showed that the evidence supported the hypothesis and further research is built upon that.

Be written in clear, concise language. Have both an independent and dependent variable. Be falsifiable — is it possible to prove or disprove the statement?

Make a prediction or speculate on an outcome. Be practicable — can you measure the variables in question? Hypothesize about a proposed relationship between two variables, or an intervention into this relationship. Consider the following hypotheses.

Are they likely to lead to sound research and conclusions, and if not, how could they be improved? Adding mica to a plastic compound will decrease its viscosity. Those who drink a cup of green tea daily experience enhanced wellness. Prolonged staring into solar eclipses confers extrasensory powers. A decline in family values is lowering the marriage rate. Children with insecure attachment style are more likely to engage in political dissent as adults. This is an ideal hypothesis statement.

It is well-phrased, clear, falsifiable and merely by reading it, one gets an idea of the kind of research design it would inspire. This hypothesis is less clear, and the problem is with the dependent variable. Though this hypothesis looks a little ridiculous, it is actually quite simple, falsifiable and easy to operationalize. The obvious problem is that scientific research seldom occupies itself with supernatural phenomenon and worse, putting this research into action will likely cause damage to its participants.

When it comes to hypotheses, not all questions need to be answered! However, scientists should always be alert for their own possible biases creeping into research, and this can occur right from the start. Normative topics with moral elements are seldom neutral. A better hypothesis will remove any contentious, subjective elements.

This hypothesis may yield very interesting and useful results, but practically, how will the researchers gather the data? Even if research is logically sound, it may not be feasible in the real world. A researcher might instead choose to make a more manageable hypothesis: Though complex, this is a good hypothesis. It is falsifiable, has clearly identified variables and can be supported or rejected using the right statistical methods.

The research hypothesis is a paring down of the problem into something testable and falsifiable. In the above example, a researcher might speculate that the decline in .

The hypothesis is a critical part of any scientific exploration. It represents what researchers expect to find in a study or experiment. In some cases, the original hypothesis will be supported and the researchers will find evidence supporting their expectations about the .

A hypothesis is used in an experiment to define the relationship between two variables. The purpose of a hypothesis is to find the answer to a question. A formalized hypothesis will force us to think about what results we should look for in an experiment. The first variable is called the independent variable. This is the part of the experiment that can be changed and tested. In the scientific method, the hypothesis is constructed before any applicable research has been done, apart from a basic background review. You ask a question, read up on what has been studied before, and then form a hypothesis.

Usage: The words hypothesis, law, and theory refer to different kinds of statements, or sets of statements, that scientists make about natural phenomena. A hypothesis is a proposition that attempts to explain a set of facts in a unified way.