what is relevance of hypothesis in research

• 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)

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

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

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

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

Table of Contents

What is a hypothesis ?  

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

What is a research hypothesis ?  

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

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

Characteristics of a good hypothesis  

Here are the characteristics of a good hypothesis :  

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

How to create an effective research hypothesis  

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

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

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

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

How to write a research hypothesis  

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

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

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

Population: athletes  

Independent variable: daily cold water showers  

Dependent variable: endurance  

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

Research hypothesis checklist  

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

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

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

Types of research hypothesis  

Different types of research hypothesis are used in scientific research:  

1. Null hypothesis:

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

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

2. Alternative hypothesis:

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

Example: “ The newly identified virus is zoonotic .”  

3. Directional hypothesis :

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

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

4. Non-directional hypothesis:

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

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

5. Simple hypothesis :

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

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

6 . Complex hypothesis :

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

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

7. Associative hypothesis:  

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

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

8 . Causal hypothesis:

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

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

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

Research hypothesis examples  

Here are some good research hypothesis examples :  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Importance of testable hypothesis  

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

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

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on research hypothesis  

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

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

2. When to reject null hypothesis ?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

9. Can research hypotheses be used in qualitative research?

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

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

Based on 21+ years of experience in academia, Researcher.Life All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $17 a month !    

Related Posts

What is a Case Study in Research? Definition, Methods, and Examples

Take Top AI Tools for Researchers for a Spin with the Editage All Access 7-Day Pass!

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

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

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

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

Research Hypothesis 101

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

What is a hypothesis?

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

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

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

Hypothesis: sleep impacts academic performance.

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

But that’s not good enough…

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

What is a research hypothesis?

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

Let’s take a look at these more closely.

Need a helping hand?

Hypothesis Essential #1: Specificity & Clarity

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

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

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

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

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

Hypothesis Essential #2: Testability (Provability)

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

For example, consider the hypothesis we mentioned earlier:

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

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

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

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

Defining A Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

What about the null hypothesis?

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

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

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

And there you have it – hypotheses in a nutshell. 

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

Psst... there’s more!

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

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

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

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

Data Interpretation – Process, Methods and...

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and...

Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

Critical Analysis – Types, Examples and Writing...

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

How to Write a Great Hypothesis

Hypothesis Definition, 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.

• Operationalization

Hypothesis Types

Hypotheses examples.

• Collecting Data

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. It is a preliminary answer to your question that helps guide the research process.

Consider a study designed to examine the relationship between sleep deprivation and test performance. The hypothesis might be: "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."

At a Glance

A hypothesis is crucial to scientific research because it offers a clear direction for what the researchers are looking to find. This allows them to design experiments to test their predictions and add to our scientific knowledge about the world. 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. At this point, researchers then 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 numerous 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 adage 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.

How to Formulate a Good Hypothesis

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.

The Importance of Operational Definitions

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.

Operational definitions are specific definitions for all relevant factors in a study. This process helps make vague or ambiguous concepts detailed and measurable.

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 various ways. Clearly defining these variables and how they are measured helps ensure that other researchers can replicate your results.

Replicability

One of the basic principles of any type of scientific research is that the results must be replicable.

Replication means repeating an experiment in the same way to produce the same results. 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. For example, 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.

To measure this variable, the researcher must devise a measurement that assesses aggressive behavior without harming others. The researcher might utilize a simulated task to measure aggressiveness in this situation.

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 there is a relationship between one independent variable and one dependent variable.
• Complex hypothesis : This type suggests a relationship between three or more variables, such as two independent and dependent variables.
• 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 population sample 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."
• "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."
• "Children who receive a new reading intervention will have higher reading scores than students who do not receive the intervention."

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:

• "There is no difference in anxiety levels between people who take St. John's wort supplements and those who do not."
• "There is no difference in scores on a memory recall task between children and adults."
• "There is no difference in aggression levels between children who play first-person shooter games and those who do not."

Examples of an alternative hypothesis:

• "People who take St. John's wort supplements will have less anxiety than those who do not."
• "Adults will perform better on a memory task than children."
• "Children who play first-person shooter games will show higher levels of aggression than children who do not." 

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  conducting an experiment is difficult or impossible. 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 examine how the variables are related. This 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.

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.

Thompson WH, Skau S. On the scope of scientific hypotheses .  R Soc Open Sci . 2023;10(8):230607. doi:10.1098/rsos.230607

Taran S, Adhikari NKJ, Fan E. Falsifiability in medicine: what clinicians can learn from Karl Popper [published correction appears in Intensive Care Med. 2021 Jun 17;:].  Intensive Care Med . 2021;47(9):1054-1056. doi:10.1007/s00134-021-06432-z

Eyler AA. Research Methods for Public Health . 1st ed. Springer Publishing Company; 2020. doi:10.1891/9780826182067.0004

Nosek BA, Errington TM. What is replication ?  PLoS Biol . 2020;18(3):e3000691. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000691

Aggarwal R, Ranganathan P. Study designs: Part 2 - Descriptive studies .  Perspect Clin Res . 2019;10(1):34-36. doi:10.4103/picr.PICR_154_18

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."

• 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

When You Have Something Important to Say, You want to Shout it From the Rooftops

Jun 28, 2024

The Item I Failed to Leave Behind — Tuesday CX Thoughts

Jun 25, 2024

Feedback Loop: What It Is, Types & How It Works?

Jun 21, 2024

QuestionPro Thrive: A Space to Visualize & Share the Future of Technology

Jun 18, 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
• Tuesday CX Thoughts (TCXT)
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples

How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples

Published on May 6, 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 20, 2023.

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 .

Example: Hypothesis

Daily apple consumption leads to fewer doctor’s visits.

Table of contents

What is a hypothesis, developing a hypothesis (with example), hypothesis examples, other interesting articles, 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 types of variables .

• An independent variable is something the researcher changes or controls.
• A dependent variable is something the researcher observes and measures.

If there are any control variables , extraneous variables , or confounding variables , be sure to jot those down as you go to minimize the chances that research bias  will affect your results.

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 .

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

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 ensure that you’re embarking on a relevant topic . This can also help you identify which variables you will study and what you think the relationships are between them. Sometimes, you’ll have to operationalize 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.

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

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.

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 .

• H 0 : The number of lectures attended by first-year students has no effect on their final exam scores.
• H 1 : The number of lectures attended by first-year students has a positive effect on their final exam scores.

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

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

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

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

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

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.

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.

McCombes, S. (2023, November 20). How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved June 28, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/hypothesis/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, construct validity | definition, types, & examples, what is a conceptual framework | tips & examples, operationalization | a guide with examples, pros & cons, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

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

• 4 minute read
• 332.5K 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.

Systematic Literature Review or Literature Review?

What is a Problem Statement? [with examples]

You may also like.

Page-Turner Articles are More Than Just Good Arguments: Be Mindful of Tone and Structure!

A Must-see for Researchers! How to Ensure Inclusivity in Your Scientific Writing

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

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

How to Develop a Good Research Hypothesis

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

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

Table of Contents

What is Hypothesis?

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

What is a Research Hypothesis?

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

Characteristics of a Good Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

Source: Educational Hub

How to formulate a research hypothesis.

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

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

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

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

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

3. Define the variables

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

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

4. Scrutinize the hypothesis

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

Types of Research Hypothesis

The types of research hypothesis are stated below:

1. Simple Hypothesis

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

2. Complex Hypothesis

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

3. Directional Hypothesis

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

4. Non-directional Hypothesis

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

5. Associative and Causal Hypothesis

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

6. Null Hypothesis

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

7. Alternative Hypothesis

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

Research Hypothesis Examples of Independent and Dependent Variables

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

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

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

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

Importance of a Testable Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

Frequently Asked Questions

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks a lot for your valuable guidance.

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

Useful piece!

This is awesome.Wow.

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

Nicely explained

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

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

clear and concise. thanks.

So Good so Amazing

Good to learn

Thanks a lot for explaining to my level of understanding

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

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

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 would be most effective in reducing research misconduct?

• Thesis Action Plan New
• Academic Project Planner

Literature Navigator

Thesis dialogue blueprint, writing wizard's template, research proposal compass.

• Why students love us
• Why professors love us
• Rebels Blog (Free)
• Why we are different
• All Products
• Coming Soon

Exploring Research Question and Hypothesis Examples: A Comprehensive Guide

This comprehensive guide explores the intricacies of formulating research questions and hypotheses across various academic disciplines. By delving into examples and methodological approaches, the article aims to provide scholars and researchers with the tools necessary to develop robust and effective research frameworks. Understanding and crafting well-formed research questions and hypotheses are pivotal in conducting meaningful research that can significantly contribute to knowledge within a field.

Key Takeaways

• Understand the fundamental differences and connections between research questions and hypotheses.
• Learn how to craft effective and precise research questions that guide the research process.
• Explore various types of hypotheses and methods for testing and refining them.
• Examine practical examples of research questions and hypotheses across multiple disciplines.
• Gain insights into the impact of well-constructed research questions and hypotheses on research outcomes, academic publishing, and grant applications.

Understanding the Fundamentals of Research Questions and Hypotheses

Defining research questions.

Research questions are the backbone of any scholarly inquiry, guiding you through the exploration of your chosen topic. They help you focus your study and determine the direction of your research. A well-crafted research question should be clear, focused, and answerable within the constraints of your study.

Characteristics of a Strong Hypothesis

A strong hypothesis provides a specific, testable prediction about the expected outcomes of your research. It is not merely a guess but is grounded in existing literature and theory. To develop a robust hypothesis, consider the variables involved and ensure that it is feasible to test them within your study's design.

Interrelation Between Research Questions and Hypotheses

Understanding the interrelation between research questions and hypotheses is crucial for structuring your research effectively. Your hypothesis should directly address the gap in the literature highlighted by your research question, providing a clear pathway for investigation. This alignment ensures that your study can contribute valuable insights to your field.

Crafting Effective Research Questions

Identifying the purpose.

To craft an effective research question , you must first identify the purpose of your study. This involves understanding what you aim to discover or elucidate through your research. Ask yourself what the core of your inquiry is and what outcomes you hope to achieve. This clarity will guide your entire research process, ensuring that your question is not only relevant but also deeply rooted in your specific academic or practical goals.

Scope and Limitations

It's crucial to define the scope and limitations of your research early on. This helps in setting realistic boundaries and expectations for your study. Consider factors such as time, resources, and the breadth of the subject area. Narrowing down your focus to a manageable scope can prevent the common pitfall of an overly broad or vague question, which can dilute the impact of your findings.

Formulating Questions that Drive Inquiry

The final step in crafting your research question is formulating it in a way that drives inquiry. This means your question should be clear, concise, and structured to prompt detailed investigation and critical analysis. It should challenge existing knowledge and push the boundaries of what is already known. Utilizing strategies like the Thesis Dialogue Blueprint or the Research Proposal Compass can be instrumental in refining your question to ensure it is both innovative and feasible.

Developing Hypotheses in Research

From research questions to hypotheses.

When you transition from research questions to hypotheses, you are essentially moving from what you want to know to what you predict will happen. This shift involves formulating a specific, testable prediction that directly stems from your initial question. Ensure your hypothesis is directly linked to and derived from your research question to maintain a coherent research strategy.

Types of Hypotheses

There are several types of hypotheses you might encounter, including simple, complex, directional, nondirectional, associative, causal, null, and alternative. Each type serves a different purpose and is chosen based on the specifics of the research question and the nature of the study. For instance, a null hypothesis might be used to test the effectiveness of a new teaching method compared to the standard.

Testing and Refining Hypotheses

Testing your hypothesis is a critical step in the research process. This phase involves collecting data, conducting experiments, or utilizing other research methods to determine the validity of your hypothesis. After testing, you may find that your hypothesis needs refining or even reformation based on the outcomes. This iterative process is essential for narrowing down the most accurate explanation or prediction for your research question.

Examples of Research Questions in Various Disciplines

Humanities and social sciences.

In the realm of Humanities and Social Sciences, research questions often explore cultural, social, historical, or philosophical aspects. How does gender representation in 20th-century American literature reflect broader social changes? This question not only seeks to uncover specific literary trends but also ties them to societal shifts, offering a rich field for analysis.

Natural Sciences

Research questions in the Natural Sciences are typically aimed at understanding natural phenomena or solving specific scientific problems. A common question might be, What are the effects of plastic pollutants on marine biodiversity? This inquiry highlights the environmental concerns and seeks empirical data to understand the impact.

Applied Sciences

In Applied Sciences, the focus is often on improving technology or engineering solutions. A pertinent question could be, How can renewable energy sources be integrated into existing power grids? This question addresses the practical challenges and potential innovations in energy systems, crucial for advancing sustainable technologies.

Analyzing Hypothesis Examples Across Fields

Case studies in psychology.

In psychology, hypotheses often explore the causal relationships between cognitive functions and behaviors. Consider how a hypothesis might predict the impact of stress on memory recall . By examining various case studies, you can see how hypotheses are specifically tailored to address intricate psychological phenomena.

Experimental Research in Biology

Biology experiments frequently test hypotheses about physiological processes or genetic information. For instance, a hypothesis might propose that a specific gene influences plant growth rates. Through rigorous testing, these hypotheses contribute significantly to our understanding of biological systems.

Field Studies in Environmental Science

Field studies in environmental science provide a rich ground for testing hypotheses related to ecosystem dynamics and conservation strategies. A common hypothesis might explore the effects of human activity on biodiversity. These studies often involve complex data collection and analysis, highlighting the interrelation between empirical evidence and theoretical predictions.

Methodological Approaches to Formulating Hypotheses

Quantitative vs. qualitative research.

When you embark on hypothesis formulation, understanding the distinction between quantitative and qualitative research methodologies is crucial. Quantitative research focuses on numerical data and statistical analysis, ideal for hypotheses that require measurable evidence. In contrast, qualitative research delves into thematic and descriptive data, providing depth and context to hypotheses that explore behaviors, perceptions, and experiences.

The Role of Theoretical Frameworks

Theoretical frameworks serve as the backbone for developing robust hypotheses. They provide a structured way to align your hypothesis with existing knowledge. By integrating theories and models relevant to your study, you ensure that your hypothesis has a solid foundation and aligns with established academic thought.

Utilizing Existing Literature to Form Hypotheses

A thorough review of existing literature is indispensable for crafting a well-informed hypothesis. This process not only highlights gaps in current research but also allows you to build on the work of others. By synthesizing findings from previous studies, you can formulate hypotheses that are both innovative and grounded in academic precedent.

Evaluating the Impact of Well-Formed Research Questions and Hypotheses

On research outcomes.

Understanding the impact of well-formed research questions and hypotheses on research outcomes is crucial. Well-crafted questions and hypotheses serve as a framework that guides the entire research process , ensuring that the study remains focused and relevant. They help in defining the scope of the study and in identifying the variables that need to be measured, thus directly influencing the validity and reliability of the research findings.

In Academic Publishing

The role of well-defined research questions and hypotheses extends beyond the research process into the realm of academic publishing. A clear hypothesis provides a strong foundation for the research paper, enhancing its chances of acceptance in prestigious journals. The clarity and direction afforded by a solid hypothesis make the research more appealing to a scholarly audience, potentially increasing citation rates and academic recognition.

In Grant Applications

When applying for research grants, the clarity of your research questions and hypotheses can significantly impact the decision-making process of funding bodies. A well-articulated hypothesis demonstrates a clear vision and a structured approach to addressing a specific issue, which can be crucial in securing funding. Grant reviewers often look for proposals that promise substantial contributions to the field, and a strong hypothesis can be a key factor in showcasing the potential impact of your research.

In our latest article, 'Evaluating the Impact of Well-Formed Research Questions and Hypotheses,' we delve into the crucial role that precise questions and hypotheses play in academic research. Understanding this can significantly enhance your thesis writing process. For a deeper exploration and practical tools to apply these concepts, visit our website and discover how our Thesis Action Plan can transform your academic journey. Don't miss out on our special offers tailored just for you!

In this comprehensive guide, we have explored various examples of research questions and hypotheses, shedding light on their significance and application in academic research. Understanding the distinction between a research question and a hypothesis, as well as knowing how to effectively formulate them, is crucial for conducting methodical and impactful studies. By examining different scenarios and examples, this guide aims to equip researchers with the knowledge to craft well-defined research questions and hypotheses that can drive meaningful investigations and contribute to the broader field of knowledge. As we continue to delve into the intricacies of research design, it is our hope that this guide serves as a valuable resource for both novice and experienced researchers in their scholarly endeavors.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a research question.

A research question is a clearly defined query that guides a scientific or academic study. It sets the scope and focus of the research by asking about a specific phenomenon or issue.

How does a hypothesis differ from a research question?

A hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction about what will happen in a study based on prior knowledge or theory, while a research question is an open query that guides the direction of the investigation.

What are the characteristics of a strong hypothesis?

A strong hypothesis is clear, testable, based on existing knowledge, and it states an expected relationship between variables.

How can research questions and hypotheses interrelate?

Research questions define the scope of inquiry, while hypotheses provide a specific prediction about the expected outcomes that can be tested through research methods.

What should be considered when formulating a research question?

When formulating a research question, consider clarity, focus, relevance, and the feasibility of answering the question through available research methods.

Why is it important to have a well-formed hypothesis?

A well-formed hypothesis directs the research process, allows for clear testing of assumptions, and helps in drawing meaningful conclusions that can contribute to the body of knowledge.

Writing a Thesis When You Don't Have Much Time: Strategies for Success

Overcoming the fear of failure in your dissertation journey, how to write a thesis: a step-by-step guide with expert tips, how to start an introduction in a thesis: a comprehensive guide, recognizing the symptoms of phd burnout: what every student needs to know.

Avoiding Procrastination Pitfalls: Bachelor Thesis Progress and Weekend Celebrations

How Do You Write a Hypothesis for a Research Paper? Step-by-Step Guide

How to Write a Thesis Fast: Tips and Strategies for Success

The Note-Taking Debate: Pros and Cons of Digital and Analog Methods

Maximize Your Academic Excellence with These 9 Evening Habits for Quality Sleep

Thesis Action Plan

• Rebels Blog
• Blog Articles
• Terms and Conditions
• Payment and Shipping Terms
• Privacy Policy
• Return Policy

© 2024 Research Rebels, All rights reserved.

Your cart is currently empty.

Understanding the importance of a research hypothesis

A research hypothesis is a specification of a testable prediction about what a researcher expects as the outcome of the study. It comprises certain aspects such as the population, variables, and the relationship between the variables. It states the specific role of the position of individual elements through empirical verification. When conducting research, there are certain assumptions that are made by the researcher. According to the available information, the goal is to present the expected outcome after testing them.

A hypothesis should be precise and accurate

A hypothesis is a clear statement of the information that the researcher intends to investigate. It is thus a clear statement that is essential before conducting research.

Based on this aspect, the features of the hypothesis are listed below:

1. Conceptual

The statement of the hypothesis is based on a certain concept i.e. it could be either related to the theory or the pre-assumption of the researcher about certain variables i.e. educated guess. This leads to linking the research questions of the study. It helps the collection of data and conducting analysis as per the stated concept.

People who shop at speciality stores tend to spend more on luxury brands as compared to those who shop at a department store.

2. Verbal statement

The research hypothesis represents a verbal statement in declarative form. The hypothesis is often stated in mathematical form. However, it brings in the possibility of representing the idea, assumption, or concept of the researcher in the form of words that could be tested.

The capability of students who are undergoing vocational training programs is not different from the students undergoing regular studies.

3. Empirical reference

By building a tentative relationship among concepts, hypothesis testing provides an empirical verification of a study. It helps validate the assumption of the researcher.

The quality of nursing education affects the quality of nursing practice skills.

4. Tentative relationship

It links the variables as per assumption and builds a tentative relationship. A hypothesis is initially unverified, therefore the relationship between variables is uncertain. Thus a predictable relationship is specified.

Sleep deprivation affects the productivity of an individual.

5. Tool of knowledge advancement

With help of a hypothesis statement, the researcher has the opportunity of verifying the available knowledge and having further enquiry about a concept. Thus, it helps the advancement of knowledge.

The effectiveness of social awareness programs influences the living standards of people.

The hypothesis statement provides the benefit of assessing the available information and making the appropriate prediction about the future. With the possibility of verifiability and identifying falsifiable information, researchers assess their assumptions and determine accurate conclusions.

People who are exposed to a high level of ultraviolet light tend to have a higher incidence of cancer.

7. Not moral

The hypothesis statement is not based on the consideration of moral values or ethics. It is as per the beliefs or assumptions of the researcher. However, testing and prediction are not entirely based on individual moral beliefs. For example, people having sample moral values would take the same strategy for business management. In this case, it is not the desired objective to study the business management strategy.

Neither too specific nor too general

A hypothesis should not be too general or too specific.

‘Actions of an individual would impact the health’ is too general, and ‘running would improve your health’ is too specific. Thus, the hypothesis for the above study is exercise does have an impact on the health of people.

Prediction of consequences

The hypothesis is the statement of the researcher’s assumption. Thus, it helps in predicting the ultimate outcome of the thesis.

Experience leads to better air traffic control management.

Even if the assumption of the researcher is proven false in testing, the result derived from the examination is valuable. With the presence of null and alternative hypotheses, each assessment of the hypothesis yields a valuable conclusion.

Separating irrelevant information from relevant information

 A hypothesis plays a significant role ineffectiveness of a study. It not only navigates the researcher but also prevents the researcher from building an inconclusive study. By guiding as light in the entire thesis, the hypothesis contributes to suggesting and testing the theories along with describing the legal or social phenomenon.

Navigate research

A hypothesis helps in identifying the areas that should be focused on for solving the research problem. It helps frame the concepts of study in a meaningful and effective manner. It also helps the researcher arrive at a conclusion for the study based on organized empirical data examination.

Prevents blind research

A hypothesis guides the researcher in the processes that need to be followed throughout the study. It prevents the researcher from collecting massive data and doing blind research which would prove irrelevant.

A platform for investigating activities

By examining conceptual and factual elements related to the problem of a thesis, the hypothesis provides a framework for drawing effective conclusions. It also helps stimulate further studies.

Describes a phenomenon

Each time a hypothesis is tested, more information about the concerned phenomenon is made available. Empirical support via hypothesis testing helps analyse aspects that were unexplored earlier.

Framing accurate research hypothesis statements

For the deduction of accurate and reliable outcomes from the analysis, belong stated things should be noted:

• Should never be formulated in the form of a question.
• Empirical testability of the hypothesis should be possible.
• A precise and specific statement of concept should be present.
• The hypothesis should not be contradictory to the identified concept and linkage between the variables.
• A clear specification of all the variables which are used for building relationships in the hypothesis should be present.
• The focus of a single hypothesis should only be on one issue. No multi-issue consideration should be taken while building the hypothesis i.e. could only be either relational or descriptive.
• The hypothesis should not be conflicting with the defined law of nature which is already specified as true.
• Effective tools and techniques need to be used for the verification of the hypothesis.
• The form of the hypothesis statement should be simple and understandable. Complex or conflicting statement reduces the applicability and reliability of the thesis results.
• The hypothesis should be amendable in the form that testing could be completed within a specified reasonable time.
• Priya Chetty

Priya is the co-founder and Managing Partner of Project Guru, a research and analytics firm based in Gurgaon. She is responsible for the human resource planning and operations functions. Her expertise in analytics has been used in a number of service-based industries like education and financial services.

Her foundational educational is from St. Xaviers High School (Mumbai). She also holds MBA degree in Marketing and Finance from the Indian Institute of Planning and Management, Delhi (2008).

Some of the notable projects she has worked on include:

• Using systems thinking to improve sustainability in operations: A study carried out in Malaysia in partnership with Universiti Kuala Lumpur.
• Assessing customer satisfaction with in-house doctors of Jiva Ayurveda (a project executed for the company)
• Predicting the potential impact of green hydrogen microgirds (A project executed for the Government of South Africa)

She is a key contributor to the in-house research platform Knowledge Tank.

She currently holds over 300 citations  from her contributions to the platform.

She has also been a guest speaker at various institutes such as JIMS (Delhi), BPIT (Delhi), and SVU (Tirupati).

I am a master's in Economics from Amity University. Having a keen interest in Econometrics and data analysis, I was a part of the Innovation Project of Daulat Ram College, Delhi University. My core expertise and interest are in environment-related issues. Apart from academics, I love music and exploring new places.

• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

4 thoughts on “Understanding the importance of a research hypothesis”

Proofreading.

What Is Research, and Why Do People Do It?

• Open Access
• First Online: 03 December 2022

Cite this chapter

You have full access to this open access chapter

• James Hiebert 6 ,
• Jinfa Cai 7 ,
• Stephen Hwang 7 ,
• Anne K Morris 6 &
• Charles Hohensee 6  

Part of the book series: Research in Mathematics Education ((RME))

19k Accesses

Abstractspiepr Abs1

Every day people do research as they gather information to learn about something of interest. In the scientific world, however, research means something different than simply gathering information. Scientific research is characterized by its careful planning and observing, by its relentless efforts to understand and explain, and by its commitment to learn from everyone else seriously engaged in research. We call this kind of research scientific inquiry and define it as “formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses.” By “hypotheses” we do not mean the hypotheses you encounter in statistics courses. We mean predictions about what you expect to find and rationales for why you made these predictions. Throughout this and the remaining chapters we make clear that the process of scientific inquiry applies to all kinds of research studies and data, both qualitative and quantitative.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download chapter PDF

Part I. What Is Research?

Have you ever studied something carefully because you wanted to know more about it? Maybe you wanted to know more about your grandmother’s life when she was younger so you asked her to tell you stories from her childhood, or maybe you wanted to know more about a fertilizer you were about to use in your garden so you read the ingredients on the package and looked them up online. According to the dictionary definition, you were doing research.

Recall your high school assignments asking you to “research” a topic. The assignment likely included consulting a variety of sources that discussed the topic, perhaps including some “original” sources. Often, the teacher referred to your product as a “research paper.”

Were you conducting research when you interviewed your grandmother or wrote high school papers reviewing a particular topic? Our view is that you were engaged in part of the research process, but only a small part. In this book, we reserve the word “research” for what it means in the scientific world, that is, for scientific research or, more pointedly, for scientific inquiry .

Exercise 1.1

Before you read any further, write a definition of what you think scientific inquiry is. Keep it short—Two to three sentences. You will periodically update this definition as you read this chapter and the remainder of the book.

This book is about scientific inquiry—what it is and how to do it. For starters, scientific inquiry is a process, a particular way of finding out about something that involves a number of phases. Each phase of the process constitutes one aspect of scientific inquiry. You are doing scientific inquiry as you engage in each phase, but you have not done scientific inquiry until you complete the full process. Each phase is necessary but not sufficient.

In this chapter, we set the stage by defining scientific inquiry—describing what it is and what it is not—and by discussing what it is good for and why people do it. The remaining chapters build directly on the ideas presented in this chapter.

A first thing to know is that scientific inquiry is not all or nothing. “Scientificness” is a continuum. Inquiries can be more scientific or less scientific. What makes an inquiry more scientific? You might be surprised there is no universally agreed upon answer to this question. None of the descriptors we know of are sufficient by themselves to define scientific inquiry. But all of them give you a way of thinking about some aspects of the process of scientific inquiry. Each one gives you different insights.

Exercise 1.2

As you read about each descriptor below, think about what would make an inquiry more or less scientific. If you think a descriptor is important, use it to revise your definition of scientific inquiry.

Creating an Image of Scientific Inquiry

We will present three descriptors of scientific inquiry. Each provides a different perspective and emphasizes a different aspect of scientific inquiry. We will draw on all three descriptors to compose our definition of scientific inquiry.

Descriptor 1. Experience Carefully Planned in Advance

Sir Ronald Fisher, often called the father of modern statistical design, once referred to research as “experience carefully planned in advance” (1935, p. 8). He said that humans are always learning from experience, from interacting with the world around them. Usually, this learning is haphazard rather than the result of a deliberate process carried out over an extended period of time. Research, Fisher said, was learning from experience, but experience carefully planned in advance.

This phrase can be fully appreciated by looking at each word. The fact that scientific inquiry is based on experience means that it is based on interacting with the world. These interactions could be thought of as the stuff of scientific inquiry. In addition, it is not just any experience that counts. The experience must be carefully planned . The interactions with the world must be conducted with an explicit, describable purpose, and steps must be taken to make the intended learning as likely as possible. This planning is an integral part of scientific inquiry; it is not just a preparation phase. It is one of the things that distinguishes scientific inquiry from many everyday learning experiences. Finally, these steps must be taken beforehand and the purpose of the inquiry must be articulated in advance of the experience. Clearly, scientific inquiry does not happen by accident, by just stumbling into something. Stumbling into something unexpected and interesting can happen while engaged in scientific inquiry, but learning does not depend on it and serendipity does not make the inquiry scientific.

Descriptor 2. Observing Something and Trying to Explain Why It Is the Way It Is

When we were writing this chapter and googled “scientific inquiry,” the first entry was: “Scientific inquiry refers to the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world and propose explanations based on the evidence derived from their work.” The emphasis is on studying, or observing, and then explaining . This descriptor takes the image of scientific inquiry beyond carefully planned experience and includes explaining what was experienced.

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, “explain” means “(a) to make known, (b) to make plain or understandable, (c) to give the reason or cause of, and (d) to show the logical development or relations of” (Merriam-Webster, n.d. ). We will use all these definitions. Taken together, they suggest that to explain an observation means to understand it by finding reasons (or causes) for why it is as it is. In this sense of scientific inquiry, the following are synonyms: explaining why, understanding why, and reasoning about causes and effects. Our image of scientific inquiry now includes planning, observing, and explaining why.

We need to add a final note about this descriptor. We have phrased it in a way that suggests “observing something” means you are observing something in real time—observing the way things are or the way things are changing. This is often true. But, observing could mean observing data that already have been collected, maybe by someone else making the original observations (e.g., secondary analysis of NAEP data or analysis of existing video recordings of classroom instruction). We will address secondary analyses more fully in Chap. 4 . For now, what is important is that the process requires explaining why the data look like they do.

We must note that for us, the term “data” is not limited to numerical or quantitative data such as test scores. Data can also take many nonquantitative forms, including written survey responses, interview transcripts, journal entries, video recordings of students, teachers, and classrooms, text messages, and so forth.

Exercise 1.3

What are the implications of the statement that just “observing” is not enough to count as scientific inquiry? Does this mean that a detailed description of a phenomenon is not scientific inquiry?

Find sources that define research in education that differ with our position, that say description alone, without explanation, counts as scientific research. Identify the precise points where the opinions differ. What are the best arguments for each of the positions? Which do you prefer? Why?

Descriptor 3. Updating Everyone’s Thinking in Response to More and Better Information

This descriptor focuses on a third aspect of scientific inquiry: updating and advancing the field’s understanding of phenomena that are investigated. This descriptor foregrounds a powerful characteristic of scientific inquiry: the reliability (or trustworthiness) of what is learned and the ultimate inevitability of this learning to advance human understanding of phenomena. Humans might choose not to learn from scientific inquiry, but history suggests that scientific inquiry always has the potential to advance understanding and that, eventually, humans take advantage of these new understandings.

Before exploring these bold claims a bit further, note that this descriptor uses “information” in the same way the previous two descriptors used “experience” and “observations.” These are the stuff of scientific inquiry and we will use them often, sometimes interchangeably. Frequently, we will use the term “data” to stand for all these terms.

An overriding goal of scientific inquiry is for everyone to learn from what one scientist does. Much of this book is about the methods you need to use so others have faith in what you report and can learn the same things you learned. This aspect of scientific inquiry has many implications.

One implication is that scientific inquiry is not a private practice. It is a public practice available for others to see and learn from. Notice how different this is from everyday learning. When you happen to learn something from your everyday experience, often only you gain from the experience. The fact that research is a public practice means it is also a social one. It is best conducted by interacting with others along the way: soliciting feedback at each phase, taking opportunities to present work-in-progress, and benefitting from the advice of others.

A second implication is that you, as the researcher, must be committed to sharing what you are doing and what you are learning in an open and transparent way. This allows all phases of your work to be scrutinized and critiqued. This is what gives your work credibility. The reliability or trustworthiness of your findings depends on your colleagues recognizing that you have used all appropriate methods to maximize the chances that your claims are justified by the data.

A third implication of viewing scientific inquiry as a collective enterprise is the reverse of the second—you must be committed to receiving comments from others. You must treat your colleagues as fair and honest critics even though it might sometimes feel otherwise. You must appreciate their job, which is to remain skeptical while scrutinizing what you have done in considerable detail. To provide the best help to you, they must remain skeptical about your conclusions (when, for example, the data are difficult for them to interpret) until you offer a convincing logical argument based on the information you share. A rather harsh but good-to-remember statement of the role of your friendly critics was voiced by Karl Popper, a well-known twentieth century philosopher of science: “. . . if you are interested in the problem which I tried to solve by my tentative assertion, you may help me by criticizing it as severely as you can” (Popper, 1968, p. 27).

A final implication of this third descriptor is that, as someone engaged in scientific inquiry, you have no choice but to update your thinking when the data support a different conclusion. This applies to your own data as well as to those of others. When data clearly point to a specific claim, even one that is quite different than you expected, you must reconsider your position. If the outcome is replicated multiple times, you need to adjust your thinking accordingly. Scientific inquiry does not let you pick and choose which data to believe; it mandates that everyone update their thinking when the data warrant an update.

Doing Scientific Inquiry

We define scientific inquiry in an operational sense—what does it mean to do scientific inquiry? What kind of process would satisfy all three descriptors: carefully planning an experience in advance; observing and trying to explain what you see; and, contributing to updating everyone’s thinking about an important phenomenon?

We define scientific inquiry as formulating , testing , and revising hypotheses about phenomena of interest.

Of course, we are not the only ones who define it in this way. The definition for the scientific method posted by the editors of Britannica is: “a researcher develops a hypothesis, tests it through various means, and then modifies the hypothesis on the basis of the outcome of the tests and experiments” (Britannica, n.d. ).

Notice how defining scientific inquiry this way satisfies each of the descriptors. “Carefully planning an experience in advance” is exactly what happens when formulating a hypothesis about a phenomenon of interest and thinking about how to test it. “ Observing a phenomenon” occurs when testing a hypothesis, and “ explaining ” what is found is required when revising a hypothesis based on the data. Finally, “updating everyone’s thinking” comes from comparing publicly the original with the revised hypothesis.

Doing scientific inquiry, as we have defined it, underscores the value of accumulating knowledge rather than generating random bits of knowledge. Formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses is an ongoing process, with each revised hypothesis begging for another test, whether by the same researcher or by new researchers. The editors of Britannica signaled this cyclic process by adding the following phrase to their definition of the scientific method: “The modified hypothesis is then retested, further modified, and tested again.” Scientific inquiry creates a process that encourages each study to build on the studies that have gone before. Through collective engagement in this process of building study on top of study, the scientific community works together to update its thinking.

Before exploring more fully the meaning of “formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses,” we need to acknowledge that this is not the only way researchers define research. Some researchers prefer a less formal definition, one that includes more serendipity, less planning, less explanation. You might have come across more open definitions such as “research is finding out about something.” We prefer the tighter hypothesis formulation, testing, and revision definition because we believe it provides a single, coherent map for conducting research that addresses many of the thorny problems educational researchers encounter. We believe it is the most useful orientation toward research and the most helpful to learn as a beginning researcher.

A final clarification of our definition is that it applies equally to qualitative and quantitative research. This is a familiar distinction in education that has generated much discussion. You might think our definition favors quantitative methods over qualitative methods because the language of hypothesis formulation and testing is often associated with quantitative methods. In fact, we do not favor one method over another. In Chap. 4 , we will illustrate how our definition fits research using a range of quantitative and qualitative methods.

Exercise 1.4

Look for ways to extend what the field knows in an area that has already received attention by other researchers. Specifically, you can search for a program of research carried out by more experienced researchers that has some revised hypotheses that remain untested. Identify a revised hypothesis that you might like to test.

Unpacking the Terms Formulating, Testing, and Revising Hypotheses

To get a full sense of the definition of scientific inquiry we will use throughout this book, it is helpful to spend a little time with each of the key terms.

We first want to make clear that we use the term “hypothesis” as it is defined in most dictionaries and as it used in many scientific fields rather than as it is usually defined in educational statistics courses. By “hypothesis,” we do not mean a null hypothesis that is accepted or rejected by statistical analysis. Rather, we use “hypothesis” in the sense conveyed by the following definitions: “An idea or explanation for something that is based on known facts but has not yet been proved” (Cambridge University Press, n.d. ), and “An unproved theory, proposition, or supposition, tentatively accepted to explain certain facts and to provide a basis for further investigation or argument” (Agnes & Guralnik, 2008 ).

We distinguish two parts to “hypotheses.” Hypotheses consist of predictions and rationales . Predictions are statements about what you expect to find when you inquire about something. Rationales are explanations for why you made the predictions you did, why you believe your predictions are correct. So, for us “formulating hypotheses” means making explicit predictions and developing rationales for the predictions.

“Testing hypotheses” means making observations that allow you to assess in what ways your predictions were correct and in what ways they were incorrect. In education research, it is rarely useful to think of your predictions as either right or wrong. Because of the complexity of most issues you will investigate, most predictions will be right in some ways and wrong in others.

By studying the observations you make (data you collect) to test your hypotheses, you can revise your hypotheses to better align with the observations. This means revising your predictions plus revising your rationales to justify your adjusted predictions. Even though you might not run another test, formulating revised hypotheses is an essential part of conducting a research study. Comparing your original and revised hypotheses informs everyone of what you learned by conducting your study. In addition, a revised hypothesis sets the stage for you or someone else to extend your study and accumulate more knowledge of the phenomenon.

We should note that not everyone makes a clear distinction between predictions and rationales as two aspects of hypotheses. In fact, common, non-scientific uses of the word “hypothesis” may limit it to only a prediction or only an explanation (or rationale). We choose to explicitly include both prediction and rationale in our definition of hypothesis, not because we assert this should be the universal definition, but because we want to foreground the importance of both parts acting in concert. Using “hypothesis” to represent both prediction and rationale could hide the two aspects, but we make them explicit because they provide different kinds of information. It is usually easier to make predictions than develop rationales because predictions can be guesses, hunches, or gut feelings about which you have little confidence. Developing a compelling rationale requires careful thought plus reading what other researchers have found plus talking with your colleagues. Often, while you are developing your rationale you will find good reasons to change your predictions. Developing good rationales is the engine that drives scientific inquiry. Rationales are essentially descriptions of how much you know about the phenomenon you are studying. Throughout this guide, we will elaborate on how developing good rationales drives scientific inquiry. For now, we simply note that it can sharpen your predictions and help you to interpret your data as you test your hypotheses.

Hypotheses in education research take a variety of forms or types. This is because there are a variety of phenomena that can be investigated. Investigating educational phenomena is sometimes best done using qualitative methods, sometimes using quantitative methods, and most often using mixed methods (e.g., Hay, 2016 ; Weis et al. 2019a ; Weisner, 2005 ). This means that, given our definition, hypotheses are equally applicable to qualitative and quantitative investigations.

Hypotheses take different forms when they are used to investigate different kinds of phenomena. Two very different activities in education could be labeled conducting experiments and descriptions. In an experiment, a hypothesis makes a prediction about anticipated changes, say the changes that occur when a treatment or intervention is applied. You might investigate how students’ thinking changes during a particular kind of instruction.

A second type of hypothesis, relevant for descriptive research, makes a prediction about what you will find when you investigate and describe the nature of a situation. The goal is to understand a situation as it exists rather than to understand a change from one situation to another. In this case, your prediction is what you expect to observe. Your rationale is the set of reasons for making this prediction; it is your current explanation for why the situation will look like it does.

You will probably read, if you have not already, that some researchers say you do not need a prediction to conduct a descriptive study. We will discuss this point of view in Chap. 2 . For now, we simply claim that scientific inquiry, as we have defined it, applies to all kinds of research studies. Descriptive studies, like others, not only benefit from formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses, but also need hypothesis formulating, testing, and revising.

One reason we define research as formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses is that if you think of research in this way you are less likely to go wrong. It is a useful guide for the entire process, as we will describe in detail in the chapters ahead. For example, as you build the rationale for your predictions, you are constructing the theoretical framework for your study (Chap. 3 ). As you work out the methods you will use to test your hypothesis, every decision you make will be based on asking, “Will this help me formulate or test or revise my hypothesis?” (Chap. 4 ). As you interpret the results of testing your predictions, you will compare them to what you predicted and examine the differences, focusing on how you must revise your hypotheses (Chap. 5 ). By anchoring the process to formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses, you will make smart decisions that yield a coherent and well-designed study.

Exercise 1.5

Compare the concept of formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses with the descriptions of scientific inquiry contained in Scientific Research in Education (NRC, 2002 ). How are they similar or different?

Exercise 1.6

Provide an example to illustrate and emphasize the differences between everyday learning/thinking and scientific inquiry.

Learning from Doing Scientific Inquiry

We noted earlier that a measure of what you have learned by conducting a research study is found in the differences between your original hypothesis and your revised hypothesis based on the data you collected to test your hypothesis. We will elaborate this statement in later chapters, but we preview our argument here.

Even before collecting data, scientific inquiry requires cycles of making a prediction, developing a rationale, refining your predictions, reading and studying more to strengthen your rationale, refining your predictions again, and so forth. And, even if you have run through several such cycles, you still will likely find that when you test your prediction you will be partly right and partly wrong. The results will support some parts of your predictions but not others, or the results will “kind of” support your predictions. A critical part of scientific inquiry is making sense of your results by interpreting them against your predictions. Carefully describing what aspects of your data supported your predictions, what aspects did not, and what data fell outside of any predictions is not an easy task, but you cannot learn from your study without doing this analysis.

Analyzing the matches and mismatches between your predictions and your data allows you to formulate different rationales that would have accounted for more of the data. The best revised rationale is the one that accounts for the most data. Once you have revised your rationales, you can think about the predictions they best justify or explain. It is by comparing your original rationales to your new rationales that you can sort out what you learned from your study.

Suppose your study was an experiment. Maybe you were investigating the effects of a new instructional intervention on students’ learning. Your original rationale was your explanation for why the intervention would change the learning outcomes in a particular way. Your revised rationale explained why the changes that you observed occurred like they did and why your revised predictions are better. Maybe your original rationale focused on the potential of the activities if they were implemented in ideal ways and your revised rationale included the factors that are likely to affect how teachers implement them. By comparing the before and after rationales, you are describing what you learned—what you can explain now that you could not before. Another way of saying this is that you are describing how much more you understand now than before you conducted your study.

Revised predictions based on carefully planned and collected data usually exhibit some of the following features compared with the originals: more precision, more completeness, and broader scope. Revised rationales have more explanatory power and become more complete, more aligned with the new predictions, sharper, and overall more convincing.

Part II. Why Do Educators Do Research?

Doing scientific inquiry is a lot of work. Each phase of the process takes time, and you will often cycle back to improve earlier phases as you engage in later phases. Because of the significant effort required, you should make sure your study is worth it. So, from the beginning, you should think about the purpose of your study. Why do you want to do it? And, because research is a social practice, you should also think about whether the results of your study are likely to be important and significant to the education community.

If you are doing research in the way we have described—as scientific inquiry—then one purpose of your study is to understand , not just to describe or evaluate or report. As we noted earlier, when you formulate hypotheses, you are developing rationales that explain why things might be like they are. In our view, trying to understand and explain is what separates research from other kinds of activities, like evaluating or describing.

One reason understanding is so important is that it allows researchers to see how or why something works like it does. When you see how something works, you are better able to predict how it might work in other contexts, under other conditions. And, because conditions, or contextual factors, matter a lot in education, gaining insights into applying your findings to other contexts increases the contributions of your work and its importance to the broader education community.

Consequently, the purposes of research studies in education often include the more specific aim of identifying and understanding the conditions under which the phenomena being studied work like the observations suggest. A classic example of this kind of study in mathematics education was reported by William Brownell and Harold Moser in 1949 . They were trying to establish which method of subtracting whole numbers could be taught most effectively—the regrouping method or the equal additions method. However, they realized that effectiveness might depend on the conditions under which the methods were taught—“meaningfully” versus “mechanically.” So, they designed a study that crossed the two instructional approaches with the two different methods (regrouping and equal additions). Among other results, they found that these conditions did matter. The regrouping method was more effective under the meaningful condition than the mechanical condition, but the same was not true for the equal additions algorithm.

What do education researchers want to understand? In our view, the ultimate goal of education is to offer all students the best possible learning opportunities. So, we believe the ultimate purpose of scientific inquiry in education is to develop understanding that supports the improvement of learning opportunities for all students. We say “ultimate” because there are lots of issues that must be understood to improve learning opportunities for all students. Hypotheses about many aspects of education are connected, ultimately, to students’ learning. For example, formulating and testing a hypothesis that preservice teachers need to engage in particular kinds of activities in their coursework in order to teach particular topics well is, ultimately, connected to improving students’ learning opportunities. So is hypothesizing that school districts often devote relatively few resources to instructional leadership training or hypothesizing that positioning mathematics as a tool students can use to combat social injustice can help students see the relevance of mathematics to their lives.

We do not exclude the importance of research on educational issues more removed from improving students’ learning opportunities, but we do think the argument for their importance will be more difficult to make. If there is no way to imagine a connection between your hypothesis and improving learning opportunities for students, even a distant connection, we recommend you reconsider whether it is an important hypothesis within the education community.

Notice that we said the ultimate goal of education is to offer all students the best possible learning opportunities. For too long, educators have been satisfied with a goal of offering rich learning opportunities for lots of students, sometimes even for just the majority of students, but not necessarily for all students. Evaluations of success often are based on outcomes that show high averages. In other words, if many students have learned something, or even a smaller number have learned a lot, educators may have been satisfied. The problem is that there is usually a pattern in the groups of students who receive lower quality opportunities—students of color and students who live in poor areas, urban and rural. This is not acceptable. Consequently, we emphasize the premise that the purpose of education research is to offer rich learning opportunities to all students.

One way to make sure you will be able to convince others of the importance of your study is to consider investigating some aspect of teachers’ shared instructional problems. Historically, researchers in education have set their own research agendas, regardless of the problems teachers are facing in schools. It is increasingly recognized that teachers have had trouble applying to their own classrooms what researchers find. To address this problem, a researcher could partner with a teacher—better yet, a small group of teachers—and talk with them about instructional problems they all share. These discussions can create a rich pool of problems researchers can consider. If researchers pursued one of these problems (preferably alongside teachers), the connection to improving learning opportunities for all students could be direct and immediate. “Grounding a research question in instructional problems that are experienced across multiple teachers’ classrooms helps to ensure that the answer to the question will be of sufficient scope to be relevant and significant beyond the local context” (Cai et al., 2019b , p. 115).

As a beginning researcher, determining the relevance and importance of a research problem is especially challenging. We recommend talking with advisors, other experienced researchers, and peers to test the educational importance of possible research problems and topics of study. You will also learn much more about the issue of research importance when you read Chap. 5 .

Exercise 1.7

Identify a problem in education that is closely connected to improving learning opportunities and a problem that has a less close connection. For each problem, write a brief argument (like a logical sequence of if-then statements) that connects the problem to all students’ learning opportunities.

Part III. Conducting Research as a Practice of Failing Productively

Scientific inquiry involves formulating hypotheses about phenomena that are not fully understood—by you or anyone else. Even if you are able to inform your hypotheses with lots of knowledge that has already been accumulated, you are likely to find that your prediction is not entirely accurate. This is normal. Remember, scientific inquiry is a process of constantly updating your thinking. More and better information means revising your thinking, again, and again, and again. Because you never fully understand a complicated phenomenon and your hypotheses never produce completely accurate predictions, it is easy to believe you are somehow failing.

The trick is to fail upward, to fail to predict accurately in ways that inform your next hypothesis so you can make a better prediction. Some of the best-known researchers in education have been open and honest about the many times their predictions were wrong and, based on the results of their studies and those of others, they continuously updated their thinking and changed their hypotheses.

A striking example of publicly revising (actually reversing) hypotheses due to incorrect predictions is found in the work of Lee J. Cronbach, one of the most distinguished educational psychologists of the twentieth century. In 1955, Cronbach delivered his presidential address to the American Psychological Association. Titling it “Two Disciplines of Scientific Psychology,” Cronbach proposed a rapprochement between two research approaches—correlational studies that focused on individual differences and experimental studies that focused on instructional treatments controlling for individual differences. (We will examine different research approaches in Chap. 4 ). If these approaches could be brought together, reasoned Cronbach ( 1957 ), researchers could find interactions between individual characteristics and treatments (aptitude-treatment interactions or ATIs), fitting the best treatments to different individuals.

In 1975, after years of research by many researchers looking for ATIs, Cronbach acknowledged the evidence for simple, useful ATIs had not been found. Even when trying to find interactions between a few variables that could provide instructional guidance, the analysis, said Cronbach, creates “a hall of mirrors that extends to infinity, tormenting even the boldest investigators and defeating even ambitious designs” (Cronbach, 1975 , p. 119).

As he was reflecting back on his work, Cronbach ( 1986 ) recommended moving away from documenting instructional effects through statistical inference (an approach he had championed for much of his career) and toward approaches that probe the reasons for these effects, approaches that provide a “full account of events in a time, place, and context” (Cronbach, 1986 , p. 104). This is a remarkable change in hypotheses, a change based on data and made fully transparent. Cronbach understood the value of failing productively.

Closer to home, in a less dramatic example, one of us began a line of scientific inquiry into how to prepare elementary preservice teachers to teach early algebra. Teaching early algebra meant engaging elementary students in early forms of algebraic reasoning. Such reasoning should help them transition from arithmetic to algebra. To begin this line of inquiry, a set of activities for preservice teachers were developed. Even though the activities were based on well-supported hypotheses, they largely failed to engage preservice teachers as predicted because of unanticipated challenges the preservice teachers faced. To capitalize on this failure, follow-up studies were conducted, first to better understand elementary preservice teachers’ challenges with preparing to teach early algebra, and then to better support preservice teachers in navigating these challenges. In this example, the initial failure was a necessary step in the researchers’ scientific inquiry and furthered the researchers’ understanding of this issue.

We present another example of failing productively in Chap. 2 . That example emerges from recounting the history of a well-known research program in mathematics education.

Making mistakes is an inherent part of doing scientific research. Conducting a study is rarely a smooth path from beginning to end. We recommend that you keep the following things in mind as you begin a career of conducting research in education.

First, do not get discouraged when you make mistakes; do not fall into the trap of feeling like you are not capable of doing research because you make too many errors.

Second, learn from your mistakes. Do not ignore your mistakes or treat them as errors that you simply need to forget and move past. Mistakes are rich sites for learning—in research just as in other fields of study.

Third, by reflecting on your mistakes, you can learn to make better mistakes, mistakes that inform you about a productive next step. You will not be able to eliminate your mistakes, but you can set a goal of making better and better mistakes.

Exercise 1.8

How does scientific inquiry differ from everyday learning in giving you the tools to fail upward? You may find helpful perspectives on this question in other resources on science and scientific inquiry (e.g., Failure: Why Science is So Successful by Firestein, 2015).

Exercise 1.9

Use what you have learned in this chapter to write a new definition of scientific inquiry. Compare this definition with the one you wrote before reading this chapter. If you are reading this book as part of a course, compare your definition with your colleagues’ definitions. Develop a consensus definition with everyone in the course.

Part IV. Preview of Chap. 2

Now that you have a good idea of what research is, at least of what we believe research is, the next step is to think about how to actually begin doing research. This means how to begin formulating, testing, and revising hypotheses. As for all phases of scientific inquiry, there are lots of things to think about. Because it is critical to start well, we devote Chap. 2 to getting started with formulating hypotheses.

Agnes, M., & Guralnik, D. B. (Eds.). (2008). Hypothesis. In Webster’s new world college dictionary (4th ed.). Wiley.

Google Scholar  

Britannica. (n.d.). Scientific method. In Encyclopaedia Britannica . Retrieved July 15, 2022 from https://www.britannica.com/science/scientific-method

Brownell, W. A., & Moser, H. E. (1949). Meaningful vs. mechanical learning: A study in grade III subtraction . Duke University Press..

Cai, J., Morris, A., Hohensee, C., Hwang, S., Robison, V., Cirillo, M., Kramer, S. L., & Hiebert, J. (2019b). Posing significant research questions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 50 (2), 114–120. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.50.2.0114

Article   Google Scholar  

Cambridge University Press. (n.d.). Hypothesis. In Cambridge dictionary . Retrieved July 15, 2022 from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/hypothesis

Cronbach, J. L. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12 , 671–684.

Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30 , 116–127.

Cronbach, L. J. (1986). Social inquiry by and for earthlings. In D. W. Fiske & R. A. Shweder (Eds.), Metatheory in social science: Pluralisms and subjectivities (pp. 83–107). University of Chicago Press.

Hay, C. M. (Ed.). (2016). Methods that matter: Integrating mixed methods for more effective social science research . University of Chicago Press.

Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Explain. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary . Retrieved July 15, 2022, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/explain

National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education . National Academy Press.

Weis, L., Eisenhart, M., Duncan, G. J., Albro, E., Bueschel, A. C., Cobb, P., Eccles, J., Mendenhall, R., Moss, P., Penuel, W., Ream, R. K., Rumbaut, R. G., Sloane, F., Weisner, T. S., & Wilson, J. (2019a). Mixed methods for studies that address broad and enduring issues in education research. Teachers College Record, 121 , 100307.

Weisner, T. S. (Ed.). (2005). Discovering successful pathways in children’s development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life . University of Chicago Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Education, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

James Hiebert, Anne K Morris & Charles Hohensee

Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

Jinfa Cai & Stephen Hwang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Hiebert, J., Cai, J., Hwang, S., Morris, A.K., Hohensee, C. (2023). What Is Research, and Why Do People Do It?. In: Doing Research: A New Researcher’s Guide. Research in Mathematics Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19078-0_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19078-0_1

Published : 03 December 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-19077-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-19078-0

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

What is Research Hypothesis: Definition, Types, and How to Develop

Read the blog to learn how a research hypothesis provides a clear and focused direction for a study and helps formulate research questions.

June 28, 2024

In this Article

A research hypothesis provides a clear, testable statement that guides the direction and focus of a study.

The benefit is that the hypothesis makes selecting appropriate research methods or statistical means possible, making the analysis more effective and achieving a result. Above all, the idea selected for the research also makes the study more focused, and the hypothesis does that best of all. Finally, when researchers propose and test a hypothesis, they can confirm, enhance, reconsider, or reject any theories.

In this blog, we'll explore the concept of a research hypothesis, its significance in research, and the various types utilized in scientific studies. Additionally, we'll provide a step-by-step guide on formulating your research hypothesis and methods for testing and evaluating it.

What is a Research Hypothesis? 

A research hypothesis is a foundational element in both qualitative and quantitative research . It is a precise, testable statement that predicts a possible relationship between two or more variables. This hypothesis is developed based on existing theories, observations, or previous research and aims to provide a direction for further investigation.

A research hypothesis starts with a question a researcher is trying to answer. It implies its effect or outcome and provides a basic ground to construct investigations, surveys, or other methods. It explains what a researcher can expect to find. Once the expectations are clearly stated, a researcher will build the methodology by choosing methods and tools for data collection and analysis.

Examples of Research Hypothesis

Here are some examples of research hypotheses across various fields:

• Hypothesis: Individuals who practice mindfulness meditation daily will report lower levels of stress compared to those who do not practice mindfulness.
• Independent Variable: Mindfulness meditation practice.
• Dependent Variable: Levels of stress.
• Hypothesis: Students who receive personalized tutoring in math will perform better on standardized tests than those who do not.
• Independent Variable: Personalized tutoring in math.
• Dependent Variable: Performance on standardized tests.
• Hypothesis: Consumers exposed to advertisements with emotional appeals will have a higher purchase intention than those with rational appeals.
• Independent Variable: Type of advertisement appeal (emotional vs. rational).
• Dependent Variable: Purchase intent .
• Hypothesis: Increasing the minimum wage will decrease employee turnover rates in the retail sector.
• Independent Variable: Minimum wage increase.
• Dependent Variable: Employee turnover rates in the retail sector.

Technology:

• Hypothesis: Users who receive personalized recommendations on a streaming platform will spend more time watching content than users who do not receive personalized recommendations.
• Independent Variable: Personalized recommendations.
• Dependent Variable: Time spent watching content.

[ Note : Here, Independent Variable is the factor manipulated or controlled in an experiment to observe its effect.

Dependent Variable is the factor that is measured or observed in an experiment to assess the impact of the independent variable.]

What is the Importance of Hypothesis in Research?

The importance of a hypothesis in research cannot be overstated, as it serves several crucial functions in the scientific inquiry process. 

Here are the key reasons why hypotheses are fundamental to research:

1. Guides the Research Process

A hypothesis gives a study a clear direction as it outlines what you intend to study and establishes the relationship you are trying to find between variables. It is precise and to the point, which helps formulate your research questions and plan your methods. Using a hypothesis helps organize the testing process from the beginning to the end of the study.

2. Defines the Variables

A well-formulated hypothesis specifies the independent and dependent variables. It defines the object of manipulation and measurement. According to the definition, the hypothesis is an assumption about the relationship between the objects of study. Since statistics is a field of research, the hypothesis is a predictive statement that can be tested empirically.

3. Facilitates Testability and Empirical Investigation

A well-defined hypothesis indicates a clear relationship between the studied variables, thus providing a foundation for designing experiments and observations. In some cases, a null hypothesis is stated to subsequently apply the appropriate statistical test to either validate an already formulated and appropriate hypothesis or reject it.

4. Enhances Objectivity

A hypothesis helps minimize researcher bias by proposing a specific prediction. It forces the researcher to rely on empirical data rather than subjective opinions or beliefs. This objectivity is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the scientific process and ensuring that the findings are credible and reliable.

5. Promotes Critical Thinking and Theoretical Frameworks

Creating a reasonable and viable hypothesis starts with deeply understanding the problem and the field. With a clear sense of the scope of existing evidence and knowledge, there would be a way to go beyond what other researchers have already done. By thoroughly reviewing the literature, researchers are in a position to critically evaluate it and identify problems or questions that remain unresolved. 

6. Enables Structured Analysis and Interpretation

A hypothesis is a tentative assumption that provides a context for data analysis and interpretation. It allows for determining specific statistical tests to run and understanding how to interpret them. If the results support the hypothesis, then there is sufficient evidence to claim and infer that the chosen variables are related in a particular way to each other. 

If the hypothesis does not match the outcomes, it raises the question of the theoretical assumptions supporting it and additional testing that may be indicated.

7. Drives Scientific Progress

Testing hypotheses continually allows researchers to enrich knowledge beyond merely investigating a particular aspect. The data supporting both hypotheses, the data refuting them, may give rise to new theories, which may serve as the foundation for new research. Such a loop significantly benefits researchers who need to extend their understanding of a particular aspect of the outer world.

{{cta-button}}

What Are The Types of Research Hypotheses?

Research hypotheses can broadly be categorized into several types, each serving different purposes in scientific inquiry. 

Here are the main types of research hypotheses:

1. Simple Hypothesis

A simple hypothesis posits a relationship between two variables. It suggests a direct cause-and-effect relationship without specifying the direction of the effect. For example:

"Increased exercise leads to improved cardiovascular health."

2. Complex Hypothesis

Complex hypotheses involve relationships between multiple variables. These hypotheses may propose how several factors interact to produce a particular outcome. For example:

"The interaction between genetic predisposition, diet, and exercise influences longevity."

3. Associative Hypothesis

An associative hypothesis suggests that there is a relationship between two variables, but it does not imply causation. It states that changes in one variable are associated with changes in another. For example:

"There is a correlation between income level and access to healthcare services."

4. Causal Hypothesis

A causal hypothesis asserts that changes in one variable directly cause changes in another. It implies a cause-and-effect relationship that can be tested through experimentation or controlled observation. For example:

"Increased consumption of sugary drinks causes an increase in body weight."

5. Directional Hypothesis

A directional hypothesis predicts the direction of the relationship between variables. It specifies whether one variable will increase or decrease in response to changes in another variable. For example:

"Higher levels of education lead to higher income levels."

6. Non-directional Hypothesis

A non-directional hypothesis does not predict the direction of the relationship between variables. It simply suggests that there is a relationship without specifying whether one variable will increase or decrease in response to changes in another variable. For example:

"There is a relationship between social media use and levels of anxiety."

7. Null Hypothesis (H₀)

The null hypothesis states no significant relationship exists between the variables being studied. It proposes that any observed differences or effects are due to random chance or sampling error. It is often used to test against the alternative hypothesis (H₁), which proposes the existence of a relationship or effect. For example:

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

How to Develop a Research Hypothesis?

Developing a research hypothesis involves a systematic process to ensure clarity, testability, and relevance to the research question. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to develop a research hypothesis:

Step 1: Identify the Research Problem or Question

Start by clearly defining the research problem or question you want to investigate. This could be based on gaps in existing literature, observations, theories, or practical issues.

Step 2: Review Existing Literature

Conduct a thorough review of relevant literature to understand what is already known about the topic. Identify theories, findings, and gaps in knowledge that can help inform the development of your hypothesis.

Step 3: Specify Variables

Identify the variables involved in your study. Variables are measurable traits, conditions, or characteristics that can change or vary. 

Specifically, determine:

Independent Variable: The factor you manipulate or study in your research.

Dependent Variable: The outcome or response you are measuring or observing about the independent variable.

Step 4: Formulate a Hypothesis

Formulate a clear and specific hypothesis based on your research problem, literature review, and identified variables. A good hypothesis should:

State the expected relationship between the independent and dependent variables.

Be testable through empirical research methods (e.g., experiments, surveys, observations).

Be concise and specific, avoiding ambiguity.

Simple hypothesis: "Increased exposure to sunlight leads to higher levels of vitamin D in humans."

Directional hypothesis: "Children who participate in regular physical activity will have lower levels of obesity than children who do not."

Non-directional hypothesis: "There is a relationship between job satisfaction and employee turnover."

Step 5: Consider Alternative Hypotheses

While formulating your hypothesis, consider alternative explanations or hypotheses that could also explain the relationship between your variables. This helps in ensuring that your hypothesis is well-grounded and comprehensive.

Step 6: Ensure Testability

Ensure that your hypothesis is testable using appropriate research methods and techniques. Define how to measure or manipulate the variables to gather empirical evidence supporting or refuting your hypothesis.

Step 7: Write and Refine

Write down your hypothesis in a clear and concise statement. Revise and refine it as needed to improve clarity and specificity. Ensure that it aligns with the objectives of your study and effectively addresses the research question.

Step 8: Seek Feedback

Before finalizing your hypothesis, seek feedback from colleagues, mentors, or peers in your field. Their input can help identify potential weaknesses or ambiguities in your hypothesis and suggest improvements.

Step 9: Finalize Your Hypothesis

Once you have refined your hypothesis based on feedback and considerations, finalize it as the guiding statement for your research study.

Characteristics of a Good Research Hypothesis

A good research hypothesis possesses several key characteristics that make it effective and suitable for investigation:

1. Clear and Specific

The hypothesis should be precise in its wording and focus. It should clearly state what the researcher intends to investigate or test.

2. Testable

A hypothesis must be capable of being empirically tested and verified or falsified through observation or experimentation. This means there should be a way to gather data that supports or refutes the hypothesis.

3. Falsifiable

There must be a possibility of proving the hypothesis false. A hypothesis that cannot be proven false typically falls outside scientific inquiry. This criterion ensures that research remains objective and open to revision based on evidence.

4. Grounded in Theory

A good hypothesis is usually based on existing theories or literature. It should be informed by a solid understanding of the topic and build upon previous research findings or established principles.

5. Rationale

It should provide a logical rationale or explanation for the expected outcome. This rationale is often derived from the literature review or preliminary observations.

6. Empirical Relevance

The hypothesis should address a question relevant to the field of study and contribute to existing knowledge. It should propose a relationship or difference between variables that is worth investigating.

While the hypothesis should be clear and specific, it should also be concise and to the point. It typically consists of a statement or a few sentences summarizing the expected relationship between variables.

8. Variables

A hypothesis should identify the variables involved and specify how they are expected to relate. This includes independent variables (the factors that are manipulated or controlled) and dependent variables (the outcomes or effects being measured).

9. Observable and Measurable

The variables in the hypothesis should be observable and measurable, allowing for data collection that can be analyzed statistically.

10. Revisable

A hypothesis is not a conclusion but a tentative assumption or prediction that guides the research process. It should be open to revision based on the study's findings.

The Role of Decode in Testing Research Hypotheses

Decode is a powerful survey and consumer research platform powered by Insights AI, that can be instrumental in testing research hypotheses. 

Here's how Decode can support you in this process:

• Survey Design and Data Collection: Craft targeted questions using Decode's intuitive interface to gather relevant data for your research.
• Exploratory Research: Conduct exploratory research to understand the landscape of your topic—Leverage Decode's functionalities for surveys and feedback mechanisms to gain valuable insights from your target audience.
• Literature Review and Background Research: Supplement your literature review by collecting data on sample populations' opinions, experiences, and preferences through Decode surveys . This combined data and a thorough literature evaluation can help you build a well-grounded hypothesis with a strong foundation in real-world knowledge.
• Identifying Variables: Design targeted survey questions within Decode to pinpoint relevant variables crucial to your research topic.
• Testing Assumptions: Before solidifying your research hypothesis, informally test your assumptions using surveys created on Decode. This allows for early feedback and potential refinement.
• Data Analysis Tools: Decode provides built-in data analysis tools. Utilize these tools to uncover patterns, correlations, and trends within the data you collect through your surveys.
• Refining Your Hypotheses: As you gather data through Decode surveys, you can continuously adjust and refine your hypotheses based on the real-world responses you receive. This iterative process ensures your hypothesis stays aligned with the insights you uncover.

Final Words

A research hypothesis serves as a guide for scientists. It is a tested idea that applies across different fields, including medicine, social sciences, and natural sciences. Integrating theories with hands-on information assists researchers in exploring and discovering new information.

Decode is a valuable tool for researchers. It simplifies creating surveys, gathering data, and analyzing information. It supports all types of research, from forming hypotheses to testing them. Start a free trial to explore its features and maximize your research potential.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a research hypothesis example.

A research hypothesis example is: "Students who receive daily math tutoring will have higher test scores than students who do not."

What do you write in a research hypothesis?

In a research hypothesis, you write a clear and testable statement predicting the relationship between two or more variables. It should specify the variables and the expected outcome.

What is the purpose of a research hypothesis?

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

With lots of unique blocks, you can easily build a page without coding.

Click on Study templates

Start from scratch

Add blocks to the content

Saving the Template

Publish the Template

A research hypothesis provides a focused direction for research. It guides the study design, data collection, and analysis by predicting a specific outcome that can be tested.

What are the three major types of hypotheses?

The three major types of hypotheses are:

• Null Hypothesis (H₀): States that there is no effect or relationship between variables.
• Alternative Hypothesis (H₁): Suggests that there is an effect or relationship between variables.
• Directional Hypothesis: Specifies the expected direction of the relationship between variables (e.g., positive or negative).

Soham is a true Manchester United fan who finds joy in more than just football. Whether navigating the open road, scoring virtual goals in FIFA, reading novels, or enjoying quality time with friends, Soham embraces a life full of diverse passions.

Product Marketing Specialist

Related Articles

Skeuomorphism in UX Design: Is It Dead?

Skeuomorphism in UX design creates intuitive interfaces using familiar real-world visuals to help users easily understand digital products. Do you know how?

Top 6 Wireframe Tools and Ways to Test Your Designs

Wireframe tools assist designers in planning and visualizing the layout of their websites. Look through this list of wireframing tools to find the one that suits you best.

Revolutionizing Customer Interaction: The Power of Conversational AI

Conversational AI enhances customer service across various industries, offering intelligent, context-aware interactions that drive efficiency and satisfaction. Here's how.

User Story Mapping: A Powerful Tool for User-Centered Product Development

Learn about user story mapping and how it can be used for successful product development with this blog.

Understanding Customer Retention: How to Keep Your Customers Coming Back

Understanding customer retention is key to building a successful brand that has repeat, loyal customers. Here's what you need to know about it.

Demographic Segmentation: How Brands Can Use it to Improve Marketing Strategies

Read this blog to learn what demographic segmentation means, its importance, and how it can be used by brands.

Mastering Product Positioning: A UX Researcher's Guide

Read this blog to understand why brands should have a well-defined product positioning and how it affects the overall business.

Discrete Vs. Continuous Data: Everything You Need To Know

Explore the differences between discrete and continuous data and their impact on business decisions and customer insights.

50+ Employee Engagement Survey Questions

Understand how an employee engagement survey provides insights into employee satisfaction and motivation, directly impacting productivity and retention.

What is Experimental Research: Definition, Types & Examples

Understand how experimental research enables researchers to confidently identify causal relationships between variables and validate findings, enhancing credibility.

A Guide to Interaction Design

Interaction design can help you create engaging and intuitive user experiences, improving usability and satisfaction through effective design principles. Here's how.

Exploring the Benefits of Stratified Sampling

Understanding stratified sampling can improve research accuracy by ensuring diverse representation across key subgroups. Here's how.

A Guide to Voice Recognition in Enhancing UX Research

Learn the importance of using voice recognition technology in user research for enhanced user feedback and insights.

The Ultimate Figma Design Handbook: Design Creation and Testing

The Ultimate Figma Design Handbook covers setting up Figma, creating designs, advanced features, prototyping, and testing designs with real users.

The Power of Organization: Mastering Information Architectures

Understanding the art of information architectures can enhance user experiences by organizing and structuring digital content effectively, making information easy to find and navigate. Here's how.

Convenience Sampling: Examples, Benefits, and When To Use It

Read the blog to understand how convenience sampling allows for quick and easy data collection with minimal cost and effort.

What is Critical Thinking, and How Can it be Used in Consumer Research?

Learn how critical thinking enhances consumer research and discover how Decode's AI-driven platform revolutionizes data analysis and insights.

How Business Intelligence Tools Transform User Research & Product Management

This blog explains how Business Intelligence (BI) tools can transform user research and product management by providing data-driven insights for better decision-making.

What is Face Validity? Definition, Guide and Examples

Read this blog to explore face validity, its importance, and the advantages of using it in market research.

What is Customer Lifetime Value, and How To Calculate It?

Read this blog to understand how Customer Lifetime Value (CLV) can help your business optimize marketing efforts, improve customer retention, and increase profitability.

Systematic Sampling: Definition, Examples, and Types

Explore how systematic sampling helps researchers by providing a structured method to select representative samples from larger populations, ensuring efficiency and reducing bias.

Understanding Selection Bias: A Guide

Selection bias can affect the type of respondents you choose for the study and ultimately the quality of responses you receive. Here’s all you need to know about it.

A Guide to Designing an Effective Product Strategy

Read this blog to explore why a well-defined product strategy is required for brands while developing or refining a product.

A Guide to Minimum Viable Product (MVP) in UX: Definition, Strategies, and Examples

Discover what an MVP is, why it's crucial in UX, strategies for creating one, and real-world examples from top companies like Dropbox and Airbnb.

Asking Close Ended Questions: A Guide

Asking the right close ended questions is they key to getting quantitiative data from your users. Her's how you should do it.

Creating Website Mockups: Your Ultimate Guide to Effective Design

Read this blog to learn website mockups- tools, examples and how to create an impactful website design.

Understanding Your Target Market And Its Importance In Consumer Research

Read this blog to learn about the importance of creating products and services to suit the needs of your target audience.

What Is a Go-To-Market Strategy And How to Create One?

Check out this blog to learn how a go-to-market strategy helps businesses enter markets smoothly, attract more customers, and stand out from competitors.

What is Confirmation Bias in Consumer Research?

Learn how confirmation bias affects consumer research, its types, impacts, and practical tips to avoid it for more accurate and reliable insights.

Market Penetration: The Key to Business Success

Understanding market penetration is key to cracking the code to sustained business growth and competitive advantage in any industry. Here's all you need to know about it.

How to Create an Effective User Interface

Having a simple, clear user interface helps your users find what they really want, improving the user experience. Here's how you can achieve it.

Product Differentiation and What It Means for Your Business

Discover how product differentiation helps businesses stand out with unique features, innovative designs, and exceptional customer experiences.

What is Ethnographic Research? Definition, Types & Examples

Read this blog to understand Ethnographic research, its relevance in today’s business landscape and how you can leverage it for your business.

Product Roadmap: The 2024 Guide [with Examples]

Read this blog to understand how a product roadmap can align stakeholders by providing a clear product development and delivery plan.

Product Market Fit: Making Your Products Stand Out in a Crowded Market

Delve into the concept of product-market fit, explore its significance, and equip yourself with practical insights to achieve it effectively.

Consumer Behavior in Online Shopping: A Comprehensive Guide

Ever wondered how online shopping behavior can influence successful business decisions? Read on to learn more.

How to Conduct a First Click Test?

Why are users leaving your site so fast? Learn how First Click Testing can help. Discover quick fixes for frustration and boost engagement.

What is Market Intelligence? Methods, Types, and Examples

Read the blog to understand how marketing intelligence helps you understand consumer behavior and market trends to inform strategic decision-making.

What is a Longitudinal Study? Definition, Types, and Examples

Is your long-term research strategy unclear? Learn how longitudinal studies decode complexity. Read on for insights.

What Is the Impact of Customer Churn on Your Business?

Understanding and reducing customer churn is the key to building a healthy business that keeps customers satisfied. Here's all you need to know about it.

The Ultimate Design Thinking Guide

Discover the power of design thinking in UX design for your business. Learn the process and key principles in our comprehensive guide.

100+ Yes Or No Survey Questions Examples

Yes or no survey questions simplify responses, aiding efficiency, clarity, standardization, quantifiability, and binary decision-making. Read some examples!

What is Customer Segmentation? The ULTIMATE Guide

Explore how customer segmentation targets diverse consumer groups by tailoring products, marketing, and experiences to their preferred needs.

Crafting User-Centric Websites Through Responsive Web Design

Find yourself reaching for your phone instead of a laptop for regular web browsing? Read on to find out what that means & how you can leverage it for business.

How Does Product Placement Work? Examples and Benefits

Read the blog to understand how product placement helps advertisers seek subtle and integrated ways to promote their products within entertainment content.

The Importance of Reputation Management, and How it Can Make or Break Your Brand

A good reputation management strategy is crucial for any brand that wants to keep its customers loyal. Here's how brands can focus on it.

A Comprehensive Guide to Human-Centered Design

Are you putting the human element at the center of your design process? Read this blog to understand why brands must do so.

How to Leverage Customer Insights to Grow Your Business

Genuine insights are becoming increasingly difficult to collect. Read on to understand the challenges and what the future holds for customer insights.

The Complete Guide to Behavioral Segmentation

Struggling to reach your target audience effectively? Discover how behavioral segmentation can transform your marketing approach. Read more in our blog!

Creating a Unique Brand Identity: How to Make Your Brand Stand Out

Creating a great brand identity goes beyond creating a memorable logo - it's all about creating a consistent and unique brand experience for your cosnumers. Here's everything you need to know about building one.

Understanding the Product Life Cycle: A Comprehensive Guide

Understanding the product life cycle, or the stages a product goes through from its launch to its sunset can help you understand how to market it at every stage to create the most optimal marketing strategies.

Empathy vs. Sympathy in UX Research

Are you conducting UX research and seeking guidance on conducting user interviews with empathy or sympathy? Keep reading to discover the best approach.

What is Exploratory Research, and How To Conduct It?

Read this blog to understand how exploratory research can help you uncover new insights, patterns, and hypotheses in a subject area.

First Impressions & Why They Matter in User Research

Ever wonder if first impressions matter in user research? The answer might surprise you. Read on to learn more!

Cluster Sampling: Definition, Types & Examples

Read this blog to understand how cluster sampling tackles the challenge of efficiently collecting data from large, spread-out populations.

Top Six Market Research Trends in 2024

Curious about where market research is headed? Read on to learn about the changes surrounding this field in 2024 and beyond.

Lyssna Alternative

Meet Qatalyst, your best lyssna alternative to usability testing, to create a solution for all your user research needs.

What is Feedback Loop? Definition, Importance, Types, and Best Practices

Struggling to connect with your customers? Read the blog to learn how feedback loops can solve your problem!

UI vs. UX Design: What’s The Difference?

Learn how UI solves the problem of creating an intuitive and visually appealing interface and how UX addresses broader issues related to user satisfaction and overall experience with the product or service.

The Impact of Conversion Rate Optimization on Your Business

Understanding conversion rate optimization can help you boost your online business. Read more to learn all about it.

Insurance Questionnaire: Tips, Questions and Significance

Leverage this pre-built customizable questionnaire template for insurance to get deep insights from your audience.

UX Research Plan Template

Read on to understand why you need a UX Research Plan and how you can use a fully customizable template to get deep insights from your users!

Brand Experience: What it Means & Why It Matters

Have you ever wondered how users navigate the travel industry for your research insights? Read on to understand user experience in the travel sector.

Validity in Research: Definitions, Types, Significance, and Its Relationship with Reliability

Is validity ensured in your research process? Read more to explore the importance and types of validity in research.

The Role of UI Designers in Creating Delightful User Interfaces

UI designers help to create aesthetic and functional experiences for users. Here's all you need to know about them.

Top Usability Testing Tools to Try in 2024

Using usability testing tools can help you understand user preferences and behaviors and ultimately, build a better digital product. Here are the top tools you should be aware of.

Understanding User Experience in Travel Market Research

Ever wondered how users navigate the travel industry for your research insights? Read on to understand user experience in the travel sector.

Top 10 Customer Feedback Tools You’d Want to Try

Explore the top 10 customer feedback tools for analyzing feedback, empowering businesses to enhance customer experience.

10 Best UX Communities on LinkedIn & Slack for Networking & Collaboration

Discover the significance of online communities in UX, the benefits of joining communities on LinkedIn and Slack, and insights into UX career advancement.

The Role of Customer Experience Manager in Consumer Research

This blog explores the role of Customer Experience Managers, their skills, their comparison with CRMs, their key metrics, and why they should use a consumer research platform.

Product Review Template

Learn how to conduct a product review and get insights with this template on the Qatalyst platform.

What Is the Role of a Product Designer in UX?

Product designers help to create user-centric digital experiences that cater to users' needs and preferences. Here's what you need to know about them.

Top 10 Customer Journey Mapping Tools For Market Research in 2024

Explore the top 10 tools in 2024 to understand customer journeys while conducting market research.

Generative AI and its Use in Consumer Research

Ever wondered how Generative AI fits in within the research space? Read on to find its potential in the consumer research industry.

All You Need to Know About Interval Data: Examples, Variables, & Analysis

Understand how interval data provides precise numerical measurements, enabling quantitative analysis and statistical comparison in research.

How to Use Narrative Analysis in Research

Find the advantages of using narrative analysis and how this method can help you enrich your research insights.

A Guide to Asking the Right Focus Group Questions

Moderated discussions with multiple participants to gather diverse opinions on a topic.

From Idea to Impact: Demystifying the Process of New Product Development

What are the stages to be undertaken during a new product development? Read all about it here.

How to Conduct Agile UX Research?

Navigating the Agile landscape: A comprehensive guide to conducting Agile UX Research with AI-powered research platforms

How Chief Product Officers Leverage User Research for Business Success

Understand the changing role of Chief Product Officers and how they should respond to evolving customer needs with user research.

Top 10 Tree Testing Tools in 2024

This blog will help you pick the best tree testing tool for you that can be utilized to identify usability issues in the website or app navigation.

Top 10 UX Design Trends in 2024

What are some of the top UX design trends that will be at the forefront in 2024? Read on to find out.

From Vision to Execution: The Essential Role of Brand Strategists in Building Strong Brands

Brand strategists help to shape the identity, perception, and market positioning of a brand. Here’s everything you need to know about them.

Conducting a Descriptive Research Design for Consumer Research

Discover the advantages of descriptive market research and why you should implement it to create an impact within your industry domain.

How to Conduct an Effective Heuristic Evaluation?

Unlocking UX Excellence: A Comprehensive Exploration of Heuristic Evaluation for Enhanced User Experience in the Digital Landscape

Step-By-Step Guide to Customer Journey Mapping

Explore the guide to customer journey mapping, offering insights, examples, and tools. Read more to optimize your customer interactions & boost brand loyalty.

Top 15 A/B Testing Tools You Should Know About

A/B testing is a great way to compare two versions and find out which works better. Here are the top A/B testing tools 15 tools you should consider.

How to Conduct Telecommunications Market Research?

Are you feeling lost in the ever-changing telecom market? This blog will help you understand the benefits of telecommunications market research and guide you in conducting one.

The Ultimate Moodboard Guide for UI/UX Designers

This guide provides comprehensive information about moodboards for UI/UX designers, including their definition, purpose, and how to create them.

Financial Market Research- Challenges and Way Ahead

Explore financial services market research, challenges, and its transformation over the years with this blog.

Questionnaire Guide: Definition, Types, and How to Design

This blog aims to help readers master the art of questionnaire development by providing detailed explanations, examples, and tips.

The Art of CPG Packaging: Trends, Innovations, and Best Practices

Delve into the world of CPG packaging and discover design strategies that drive consumer engagement and brand loyalty.

Hotjar Alternative

Here’s everything you want to know about Qatalyst, your best user research alternative for Hotjar.

Affinity Mapping: How to Use It for UX Research?

Read the blog to learn how UX researchers use affinity mapping to handle qualitative data for product design decisions.

Kung Fu Panda 4 Trailer: Insights from Decode Platform Survey

While everyone waits for the fluffiest and clumsiest panda to be back on the big screen, let us look at what Decode platform test findings have to say about the new trailer.

Crafting Seamless Player Experiences: The Fusion of Game Design and UX

Discover how incorporating tester insights and UX principles can revolutionize video game design, creating immersive and engaging player experiences.

Top 10 Consumer Insights Tools For Market Research in 2024

Stay ahead with the top 10 consumer insights tools for market research in 2024 to boost customer experience.

What Is the Role of a Product Manager?

Product managers are the architects behind some of the most successful and intuitive products in the market. Here’s what you need to know about them.

Dovetail Alternative

Meet Decode, your best alternative to Dovetail to create a solution for all your consumer research needs.

Maximize Your Research Potential

Experience why teams worldwide trust our Consumer & User Research solutions.

Book a Demo

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy: exploring shared pathways and promising biomarkers for future treatments.

1. Introduction

2. materials and methods, 3.1. epidemiological data describing the comorbidity of alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy, 3.2. risk factors implicated in both alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy, 3.2.1. shared risk factors between alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy, 3.2.2. risk factors for epilepsy in individuals with alzheimer’s disease, 3.2.3. risk factors for dementia in epileptic patients, 3.3. shared pathogenetic mechanisms between alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy, 3.3.1. amyloid-β, 3.3.2. hyperphosphorylated tau protein, 3.3.3. glutamate, 3.3.4. gamma-aminobutyric acid, 3.3.5. neuroinflammation, 3.3.6. acetylcholine—noradrenaline—serotonin activity, 3.3.7. voltage-gated ion channels, 3.3.8. mitochondria–endoplasmic reticulum stress, 3.3.9. astrocytes, 3.3.10. beta-secretase 1, 3.3.11. mechanistic target of rapamycin, 3.3.12. triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells, 3.3.13. α-synuclein, 3.3.14. neural network, 3.3.15. the role of sleep, 3.3.16. others, 3.4. seizure types, 3.5. electroencephalography, 3.6. biomarkers, 3.6.1. cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, 3.6.2. neuroimaging findings, 3.6.3. cognitive testing, 3.6.4. genetic associations, 3.6.5. electroencephalographic markers, 3.7. therapy, 4. discussion, conflicts of interest, abbreviations.

• World Health Organization. Dementia 2023. (Updated 15 March 2023). Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/dementia (accessed on 30 May 2024).
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A Public Health Approach to Alzheimer’s and Other Dementias. 2019. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/aging/services/pdf/Public-Health-Approach-to-Alzheimers-and-Other-Dementias-complete-course-508.pdf (accessed on 30 May 2024).
• World Health Organization. Epilepsy: A Public Health Imperative ; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vicente, M.; Addo-Osafo, K.; Vossel, K. Latest advances in mechanisms of epileptic activity in Alzheimer’s disease and dementia with Lewy Bodies. Front. Neurol. 2024 , 15 , 1277613. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, D.A.; Lee, H.J.; Kim, S.E.; Park, K.M. Brain networks and epilepsy development in patients with Alzheimer disease. Brain Behav. 2023 , 13 , e3152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Helmstaedter, C.; Lutz, T.; Wolf, V.; Witt, J.A. Prevalence of dementia in a level 4 university epilepsy center: How big is the problem? Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1217594. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hickman, L.B.; Stern, J.M.; Silverman, D.H.S.; Salamon, N.; Vossel, K. Clinical, imaging, and biomarker evidence of amyloid- and tau-related neurodegeneration in late-onset epilepsy of unknown etiology. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1241638. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tan, Z.; Wang, F.Y.; Wu, W.P.; Yu, L.Z.; Wu, J.C.; Wang, L. Bidirectional relationship between late-onset epilepsy (LOE) and dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Epilepsy Behav. 2024 , 153 , 109723. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, D.; Chen, S.; Xu, S.; Wu, J.; Zhuang, Y.; Cao, W.; Chen, X.; Li, X. The clinical correlation between Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy. Front. Neurol. 2022 , 13 , 922535. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhao, N.; Chen, H.; Zhang, W.; Yao, J.; Tu, Q.; Yu, X.; Sun, X. Bidirectional influences between seizures and dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2022 , 37 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, F.; Chen, L.; Yu, Y.; Xu, T.; Chen, L.; Yang, W.; Wu, Q.; Han, Y. Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy: An increasingly recognized comorbidity. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2022 , 14 , 940515. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, L.; Yang, W.; Yang, F.; Yu, Y.; Xu, T.; Wang, D.; Zhao, Q.; Wu, Q.; Han, Y. The crosstalk between epilepsy and dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Epilepsy Behav. 2024 , 152 , 109640. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nous, A.; Seynaeve, L.; Feys, O.; Wens, V.; De Tiège, X.; Van Mierlo, P.; Baroumand, A.G.; Nieboer, K.; Allemeersch, G.J.; Mangelschots, S.; et al. Subclinical epileptiform activity in the Alzheimer continuum: Association with disease, cognition and detection method. Alzheimers Res. Ther. 2024 , 16 , 19. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, H.C.; Kim, B.K.; Kang, K.; Lee, W.W.; Yoo, I.; Kim, Y.S.; Lee, J.J. Aphasic Status Epilepticus Associated with Alzheimer’s Disease: Clinical and Electrographic Characteristics. J. Epilepsy Res. 2023 , 13 , 55–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lu, O.; Kouser, T.; Skylar-Scott, I.A. Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy: Shared neuropathology guides current and future treatment strategies. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1241339. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dun, C.; Zhang, Y.; Yin, J.; Su, B.; Peng, X.; Liu, L. Bi-directional associations of epilepsy with dementia and Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Age Ageing 2022 , 51 , afac010. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zheng, S.F.; Hu, J.J.; Zhang, Y.B.; Chen, G.R.; Lin, Y.X.; Kang, D.Z.; Lin, Z.Y.; Yao, P.S. Lack of causal association between epilepsy and dementia: A Mendelian randomization analysis. Epilepsy Behav. 2024 , 150 , 109570. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kawakami, O.; Koike, Y.; Ando, T.; Sugiura, M.; Kato, H.; Hiraga, K.; Kito, H.; Kondo, H. Incidence of dementia in patients with adult-onset epilepsy of unknown causes. J. Neurol. Sci. 2018 , 395 , 71–76. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Del Pozo, A.; Knox, K.M.; Lehmann, L.M.; Davidson, S.; Rho, S.L.; Jayadev, S.; Barker-Haliski, M. Chronic evoked seizures in young pre-symptomatic APP/PS1 mice induce serotonin changes and accelerate onset of Alzheimer’s disease-related neuropathology. Prog. Neurobiol. 2024 , 235 , 102591. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Haoudy, S.; Jonveaux, T.; Puisieux, S.; Epstein, J.; Hopes, L.; Maillard, L.; Aron, O.; Tyvaert, L. Epilepsy in Early Onset Alzheimer’s Disease. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2022 , 85 , 615–626. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cano, A.; Fonseca, E.; Ettcheto, M.; Sánchez-López, E.; de Rojas, I.; Alonso-Lana, S.; Morató, X.; Souto, E.B.; Toledo, M.; Boada, M.; et al. Epilepsy in Neurodegenerative Diseases: Related Drugs and Molecular Pathways. Pharmaceuticals 2021 , 14 , 1057. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ciliento, R.; Gjini, K.; Dabbs, K.; Hermann, B.; Riedner, B.; Jones, S.; Fatima, S.; Johnson, S.; Bendlin, B.; Lam, A.D.; et al. Prevalence and localization of nocturnal epileptiform discharges in mild cognitive impairment. Brain Commun. 2023 , 5 , fcad302. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vöglein, J.; Noachtar, S.; McDade, E.; Quaid, K.A.; Salloway, S.; Ghetti, B.; Noble, J.; Berman, S.; Chhatwal, J.; Mori, H.; et al. Seizures as an early symptom of autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease. Neurobiol. Aging 2019 , 76 , 18–23. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cortini, F.; Cantoni, C.; Villa, C. Epileptic seizures in autosomal dominant forms of Alzheimer’s disease. Seizure—Eur. J. Epilepsy 2018 , 61 , 4–7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nagino, N.; Kubota, Y.; Nakamoto, H.; Miyao, S.; Kodama, T.; Ito, S.; Oguni, H.; Chernov, M. Non-lesional late-onset epilepsy in the elderly Japanese patients: Presenting characteristics and seizure outcomes with regard to comorbid dementia. J. Clin. Neurosci. 2022 , 103 , 100–106. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Leitner, D.F.; Kanshin, E.; Faustin, A.; Thierry, M.; Friedman, D.; Devore, S.; Ueberheide, B.; Devinsky, O.; Wisniewski, T. Localized proteomic differences in the choroid plexus of Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy patients. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1221775. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Altuna, M.; Olmedo-Saura, G.; Carmona-Iragui, M.; Fortea, J. Mechanisms Involved in Epileptogenesis in Alzheimer’s Disease and Their Therapeutic Implications. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022 , 23 , 4307. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kazim, S.F.; Seo, J.H.; Bianchi, R.; Larson, C.S.; Sharma, A.; Wong, R.K.S.; Gorbachev, K.Y.; Pereira, A.C. Neuronal Network Excitability in Alzheimer’s Disease: The Puzzle of Similar versus Divergent Roles of Amyloid β and Tau. eNeuro 2021 , 8 , 1–35. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Csernus, E.A.; Werber, T.; Kamondi, A.; Horvath, A.A. The Significance of Subclinical Epileptiform Activity in Alzheimer’s Disease: A Review. Front. Neurol. 2022 , 13 , 856500. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Horvath, A.A.; Papp, A.; Zsuffa, J.; Szucs, A.; Luckl, J.; Radai, F.; Nagy, F.; Hidasi, Z.; Csukly, G.; Barcs, G.; et al. Subclinical epileptiform activity accelerates the progression of Alzheimer’s disease: A long-term EEG study. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2021 , 132 , 1982–1989. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yeh, W.-C.; Hsu, C.-Y.; Li, K.-Y.; Chien, C.-F.; Huang, L.-C.; Yang, Y.-H. Association between Subclinical Epileptiform Discharge and the Severity of Cognitive Decline in Alzheimer’s Disease: A Longitudinal Cohort Study. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. 2022 , 90 , 305–312. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Devulder, A.; Macea, J.; Kalkanis, A.; De Winter, F.L.; Vandenbulcke, M.; Vandenberghe, R.; Testelmans, D.; Van Den Bossche, M.J.A.; Van Paesschen, W. Subclinical epileptiform activity and sleep disturbances in Alzheimer’s disease. Brain Behav. 2023 , 13 , e3306. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Baker, J.; Libretto, T.; Henley, W.; Zeman, A. A Longitudinal Study of Epileptic Seizures in Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Neurol. 2019 , 10 , 1266. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lehmann, L.; Lo, A.; Knox, K.M.; Barker-Haliski, M. Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy: A Perspective on the Opportunities for Overlapping Therapeutic Innovation. Neurochem. Res. 2021 , 46 , 1895–1912. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Das, M.; Mao, W.; Voskobiynyk, Y.; Necula, D.; Lew, I.; Petersen, C.; Zahn, A.; Yu, G.Q.; Yu, X.; Smith, N.; et al. Alzheimer risk-increasing TREM2 variant causes aberrant cortical synapse density and promotes network hyperexcitability in mouse models. Neurobiol. Dis. 2023 , 186 , 106263. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fu, M.; Tran, T.; Eskin, E.; Lajonchere, C.; Pasaniuc, B.; Geschwind, D.H.; Vossel, K.; Chang, T.S. Multi-class Modeling Identifies Shared Genetic Risk for Late-onset Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease. medRxiv 2024 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wijaya, A.; Setiawan, N.A.; Ahmad, A.H.; Zakaria, R.; Othman, Z. Electroencephalography and mild cognitive impairment research: A scoping review and bibliometric analysis (ScoRBA). AIMS Neurosci. 2023 , 10 , 154–171. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lyou, H.J.; Seo, K.D.; Lee, J.E.; Pak, H.Y.; Lee, J.H. Association of Alzheimer’s Disease with the Risk of Developing Epilepsy: A 10-Year Nationwide Cohort Study. Dement. Neurocogn Disord. 2018 , 17 , 156–162. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lamoureux, L.; Marottoli, F.M.; Tseng, K.Y.; Tai, L.M. APOE4 Promotes Tonic-Clonic Seizures, an Effect Modified by Familial Alzheimer’s Disease Mutations. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2021 , 9 , 656521. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Keret, O.; Hoang, T.D.; Xia, F.; Rosen, H.J.; Yaffe, K. Association of Late-Onset Unprovoked Seizures of Unknown Etiology with the Risk of Developing Dementia in Older Veterans. JAMA Neurol. 2020 , 77 , 710–715. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cretin, B.; Bousiges, O.; Hautecloque, G.; Philippi, N.; Blanc, F.; Dibitonto, L.; Martin-Hunyadi, C.; Sellal, F. CSF in Epileptic Prodromal Alzheimer’s Disease: No Diagnostic Contribution but a Pathophysiological One. Front. Neurol. 2021 , 12 , 623777. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Powell, G.; Ziso, B.; Larner, A.J. The overlap between epilepsy and Alzheimer’s disease and the consequences for treatment. Expert. Rev. Neurother. 2019 , 19 , 653–661. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Emsley, H.C.A.; Parkes, L.M. Seizures in the context of occult cerebrovascular disease. Epilepsy Behav. 2020 , 104 Pt B , 106396. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Turon, M.; Abraira, L.; Cazorla, S.; Fonseca, E.; Quintana, M.; Toledo, M.; Salas-Puig, X.; Santamarina, E. Vascular risk factors as independent predictors of neurocognitive impairments in patients with late-onset epilepsy who have small-vessel disease. Epilepsy Behav. 2020 , 104 Pt B , 106443. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Huang, L.; Fu, C.; Li, J.; Peng, S. Late-onset epilepsy and the risk of dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2022 , 34 , 1771–1779. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Milikovsky, D.Z.; Ofer, J.; Senatorov, V.V.; Friedman, A.R.; Prager, O.; Sheintuch, L.; Elazari, N.; Veksler, R.; Zelig, D.; Weissberg, I.; et al. Paroxysmal slow cortical activity in Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy is associated with blood-brain barrier dysfunction. Sci. Transl. Med. 2019 , 11 , eaaw8954. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sen, A.; Capelli, V.; Husain, M. Cognition and dementia in older patients with epilepsy. Brain 2018 , 141 , 1592–1608. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Paudel, Y.N.; Angelopoulou, E.; Jones, N.C.; O’Brien, T.J.; Kwan, P.; Piperi, C.; Othman, I.; Shaikh, M.F. Tau Related Pathways as a Connecting Link between Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2019 , 10 , 4199–4212. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, Y.; Lavrencic, L.; Radford, K.; Booth, A.; Yoshimura, S.; Anstey, K.J.; Anderson, C.S.; Peters, R. Systematic review of coexistent epileptic seizures and Alzheimer’s disease: Incidence and prevalence. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2021 , 69 , 2011–2020. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Asadollahi, M.; Atazadeh, M.; Noroozian, M. Seizure in Alzheimer’s Disease: An Underestimated Phenomenon. Am. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. Other Dement. 2018 , 34 , 81–88. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Horváth, A.; Szűcs, A.; Hidasi, Z.; Csukly, G.; Barcs, G.; Kamondi, A. Prevalence, Semiology, and Risk Factors of Epilepsy in Alzheimer’s Disease: An Ambulatory EEG Study. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. 2018 , 63 , 1045–1054. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tábuas-Pereira, M.; Durães, J.; Lopes, J.; Sales, F.; Bento, C.; Duro, D.; Santiago, B.; Almeida, M.R.; Leitão, M.J.; Baldeiras, I.; et al. Increased CSF tau is associated with a higher risk of seizures in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Epilepsy Behav. 2019 , 98 , 207–209. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tai, X.Y.; Torzillo, E.; Lyall, D.M.; Manohar, S.; Husain, M.; Sen, A. Association of Dementia Risk With Focal Epilepsy and Modifiable Cardiovascular Risk Factors. JAMA Neurol. 2023 , 80 , 445–454. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hernández, G.; Sala-Padró, J.; Adell, V.; Rico, I.; Gasa-Roqué, A.; Morandeira, F.; Campdelacreu, J.; Gascon, J.; Falip, M. Cognitive decline in adult-onset temporal lobe epilepsy: Insights from aetiology. Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 2024 , 237 , 108159. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tsai, Z.R.; Zhang, H.W.; Tseng, C.H.; Peng, H.C.; Kok, V.C.; Li, G.P.; Hsiung, C.A.; Hsu, C.Y. Late-onset epilepsy and subsequent increased risk of dementia. Aging 2021 , 13 , 3573–3587. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, L.; Wang, Q. The bidirectional relationship between Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and epilepsy: A Mendelian randomization study. Brain Behav. 2023 , 13 , e3221. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mao, R.; Hu, M.; Liu, X.; Ye, L.; Xu, B.; Sun, M.; Xu, S.; Shao, W.; Tan, Y.; Xu, Y.; et al. Impairments of GABAergic transmission in hippocampus mediate increased susceptibility of epilepsy in the early stage of Alzheimer’s disease. Cell Commun. Signal 2024 , 22 , 147. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Martin, S.P.; Leeman-Markowski, B.A. Proposed mechanisms of tau: Relationships to traumatic brain injury, Alzheimer’s disease, and epilepsy. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1287545. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Leitner, D.; Pires, G.; Kavanagh, T.; Kanshin, E.; Askenazi, M.; Ueberheide, B.; Devinsky, O.; Wisniewski, T.; Drummond, E. Similar brain proteomic signatures in Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy. Acta Neuropathol. 2024 , 147 , 27. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Szabo, A.B.; Cretin, B.; Gérard, F.; Curot, J.; Barbeau, E.J.; Pariente, J.; Dahan, L.; Valton, L. Sleep: The Tip of the Iceberg in the Bidirectional Link Between Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy. Front. Neurol. 2022 , 13 , 836292. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hector, A.; Brouillette, J. Hyperactivity Induced by Soluble Amyloid-β Oligomers in the Early Stages of Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 2020 , 13 , 600084. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bosco, F.; Guarnieri, L.; Rania, V.; Palma, E.; Citraro, R.; Corasaniti, M.T.; Leo, A.; De Sarro, G. Antiseizure Medications in Alzheimer’s Disease from Preclinical to Clinical Evidence. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023 , 24 , 2639. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lemus, H.N.; Sarkis, R.A. Interictal epileptiform discharges in Alzheimer’s disease: Prevalence, relevance, and controversies. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1261136. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Toral-Rios, D.; Pichardo-Rojas, P.S.; Alonso-Vanegas, M.; Campos-Peña, V. GSK3β and Tau Protein in Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy. Front. Cell Neurosci. 2020 , 14 , 19. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sarkis, R.A.; Willment, K.C.; Pennell, P.B.; Marshall, G. Late-onset unexplained epilepsy: What are we missing? Epilepsy Behav. 2019 , 99 , 106478. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Leo, A.; Tallarico, M.; Sciaccaluga, M.; Citraro, R.; Costa, C. Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease: Current Concepts and Treatment Perspective on Two Closely Related Pathologies. Curr. Neuropharmacol. 2022 , 20 , 2029–2033. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yook, Y.; Lee, K.Y.; Kim, E.; Lizarazo, S.; Yu, X.; Tsai, N.P. Hyperfunction of post-synaptic density protein 95 promotes seizure response in early-stage aβ pathology. EMBO Rep. 2024 , 25 , 1233–1255. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Banote, R.K.; Håkansson, S.; Zetterberg, H.; Zelano, J. CSF biomarkers in patients with epilepsy in Alzheimer’s disease: A nation-wide study. Brain Commun. 2022 , 4 , fcac210. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zawar, I.; Kapur, J. Does Alzheimer’s disease with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy represent a distinct disease subtype? Alzheimers Dement. 2023 , 19 , 2697–2706. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Silva, J.C.; Vivash, L.; Malpas, C.B.; Hao, Y.; McLean, C.; Chen, Z.; O’Brien, T.J.; Jones, N.C.; Kwan, P. Low prevalence of amyloid and tau pathology in drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia 2021 , 62 , 3058–3067. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Carello-Collar, G.; Bellaver, B.; Ferreira, P.C.L.; Ferrari-Souza, J.P.; Ramos, V.G.; Therriault, J.; Tissot, C.; De Bastiani, M.A.; Soares, C.; Pascoal, T.A.; et al. The GABAergic system in Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Mol. Psychiatry 2023 , 28 , 5025–5036. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tang, T.; Li, X.; Yu, E.; Li, M.; Pan, X. Identification of common core ion channel genes in epilepsy and Alzheimer’s disease. Ir. J. Med. Sci. 2024 , 193 , 417–424. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liew, Y.; Retinasamy, T.; Arulsamy, A.; Ali, I.; Jones, N.C.; O’Brien, T.J.; Shaikh, M.F. Neuroinflammation: A Common Pathway in Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2023 , 94 , S253–s265. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zheng, X.Y.; Zhang, H.C.; Lv, Y.D.; Jin, F.Y.; Wu, X.J.; Zhu, J.; Ruan, Y. Levetiracetam alleviates cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease animal model by ameliorating the dysfunction of the neuronal network. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2022 , 14 , 888784. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, Z.R.; Huang, J.B.; Yang, S.L.; Hong, F.F. Role of Cholinergic Signaling in Alzheimer’s Disease. Molecules 2022 , 27 , 1816. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, Y.; Tan, B.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Z. Cholinergic Signaling, Neural Excitability, and Epilepsy. Molecules 2021 , 26 , 2258. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Giorgi, F.S.; Saccaro, L.F.; Busceti, C.L.; Biagioni, F.; Fornai, F. Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease: Potential mechanisms for an association. Brain Res. Bull. 2020 , 160 , 107–120. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yun, H.M.; Park, K.R.; Kim, E.C.; Kim, S.; Hong, J.T. Serotonin 6 receptor controls Alzheimer’s disease and depression. Oncotarget 2015 , 6 , 26716–26728. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tian, J.; Du, E.; Guo, L. Mitochondrial Interaction with Serotonin in Neurobiology and Its Implication in Alzheimer’s Disease. J. Alzheimers Dis. Rep. 2023 , 7 , 1165–1177. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Acquarone, E.; Argyrousi, E.K.; Arancio, O.; Watterson, D.M.; Roy, S.M. The 5HT2b Receptor in Alzheimer’s Disease: Increased Levels in Patient Brains and Antagonist Attenuation of Amyloid and Tau Induced Dysfunction. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2024 , 98 , 1349–1360. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Eremin, D.V.; Kondaurova, E.M.; Rodnyy, A.Y.; Molobekova, C.A.; Kudlay, D.A.; Naumenko, V.S. Serotonin Receptors as a Potential Target in the Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease. Biochemistry 2023 , 88 , 2023–2042. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sayahi, Z.; Komaki, A.; Saidi Jam, M.; Karimi, S.A.; Raoufi, S.; Mardani, P.; Naderishahab, M.; Sarihi, A.; Mirnajafi-Zadeh, J. Effect of ramosetron, a 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist on the severity of seizures and memory impairment in electrical amygdala kindled rats. J. Physiol. Sci. 2022 , 72 , 1. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cai, L.; Xu, Z.; Luo, H.; He, Q.; Diao, L.; Gui, X.; Wei, L. The association between 5-HT1A binding and temporal lobe epilepsy: A meta-analysis of molecular imaging studies. Epilepsy Behav. 2023 , 145 , 109354. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rizzello, E.; Pimpinella, D.; Pignataro, A.; Titta, G.; Merenda, E.; Saviana, M.; Porcheddu, G.F.; Paolantoni, C.; Malerba, F.; Giorgi, C.; et al. Lamotrigine rescues neuronal alterations and prevents seizure-induced memory decline in an Alzheimer’s disease mouse model. Neurobiol. Dis. 2023 , 181 , 106106. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kang, J.Q. Epileptic Mechanisms Shared by Alzheimer’s Disease: Viewed via the Unique Lens of Genetic Epilepsy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021 , 22 , 7133. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Bosco, D.B.; Kremen, V.; Haruwaka, K.; Zhao, S.; Wang, L.; Ebner, B.A.; Zheng, J.; Dheer, A.; Perry, J.F.; Xie, M.; et al. Impaired microglial phagocytosis promotes seizure development. bioRxiv 2024 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tosun, D.; Hausle, Z.; Iwaki, H.; Thropp, P.; Lamoureux, J.; Lee, E.B.; MacLeod, K.; McEvoy, S.; Nalls, M.; Perrin, R.J.; et al. A cross-sectional study of α-synuclein seed amplification assay in Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative: Prevalence and associations with Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers and cognitive function. Alzheimers Dement. 2024 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Horvath, A.A.; Csernus, E.A.; Lality, S.; Kaminski, R.M.; Kamondi, A. Inhibiting Epileptiform Activity in Cognitive Disorders: Possibilities for a Novel Therapeutic Approach. Front. Neurosci. 2020 , 14 , 557416. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Hanke, J.M.; Schindler, K.A.; Seiler, A. On the relationships between epilepsy, sleep, and Alzheimer’s disease: A narrative review. Epilepsy Behav. 2022 , 129 , 108609. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Sánchez, M.P.; García-Cabrero, A.M.; Sánchez-Elexpuru, G.; Burgos, D.F.; Serratosa, J.M. Tau-Induced Pathology in Epilepsy and Dementia: Notions from Patients and Animal Models. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018 , 19 , 1092. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Fang, Y.; Si, X.; Wang, J.; Wang, Z.; Chen, Y.; Liu, Y.; Yan, Y.; Tian, J.; Zhang, B.; Pu, J. Alzheimer Disease and Epilepsy: A Mendelian Randomization Study. Neurology 2023 , 101 , e399–e409. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rey, C.; Cattaud, V.; Rampon, C.; Verret, L. What’s New on Alzheimer’s Disease? Insights From AD Mouse Models ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Song, S.; Chen, J.; Xiao, P.; Duan, H.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, F.; Wang, H.; Zhao, Y.; Geng, Z. Role of Macrophages in Status Epilepticus Predisposing to Alzheimer’s Disease. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2020 , 73 , 375–382. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lin, R.; Jones, N.C.; Kwan, P. Unravelling the Role of Glycogen Synthase Kinase-3 in Alzheimer’s Disease-Related Epileptic Seizures. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020 , 21 , 3676. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jiang, X.; Lu, H.; Liu, W.; Wu, Z.; Wu, Q.; Li, X.; Xu, Z.; Hui, F.; Zhao, Q. The overlap between Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy uncovered by transcriptome sequencing. Clin. Transl. Med. 2020 , 10 , e169. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Fu, C.H.; Iascone, D.M.; Petrof, I.; Hazra, A.; Zhang, X.; Pyfer, M.S.; Tosi, U.; Corbett, B.F.; Cai, J.; Lee, J.; et al. Early Seizure Activity Accelerates Depletion of Hippocampal Neural Stem Cells and Impairs Spatial Discrimination in an Alzheimer’s Disease Model. Cell Rep. 2019 , 27 , 3741–3751.e4. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lehmann, L.M.; Barker-Haliski, M. Loss of normal Alzheimer’s disease-associated Presenilin 2 function alters antiseizure medicine potency and tolerability in the 6-Hz focal seizure model. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1223472. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Cope, Z.A.; Murai, T.; Sukoff Rizzo, S.J. Emerging Electroencephalographic Biomarkers to Improve Preclinical to Clinical Translation in Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2022 , 14 , 805063. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Yu, T.; Liu, X.; Wu, J.; Wang, Q. Electrophysiological Biomarkers of Epileptogenicity in Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2021 , 15 , 747077. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lam, A.D.; Sarkis, R.A.; Pellerin, K.R.; Jing, J.; Dworetzky, B.A.; Hoch, D.B.; Jacobs, C.S.; Lee, J.W.; Weisholtz, D.S.; Zepeda, R.; et al. Association of epileptiform abnormalities and seizures in Alzheimer disease. Neurology 2020 , 95 , e2259–e2270. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Musaeus, C.S.; Frederiksen, K.S.; Andersen, B.B.; Høgh, P.; Kidmose, P.; Fabricius, M.; Hribljan, M.C.; Hemmsen, M.C.; Rank, M.L.; Waldemar, G.; et al. Detection of subclinical epileptiform discharges in Alzheimer’s disease using long-term outpatient EEG monitoring. Neurobiol. Dis. 2023 , 183 , 106149. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Johnson, E.L.; Sullivan, K.J.; Schneider, A.L.C.; Simino, J.; Mosley, T.H.; Kucharska-Newton, A.; Knopman, D.S.; Gottesman, R.F. Association of Plasma Aβ(42)/Aβ(40) Ratio and Late-Onset Epilepsy: Results From the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. Neurology 2023 , 101 , e1319–e1327. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Nardi Cesarini, E.; Babiloni, C.; Salvadori, N.; Farotti, L.; Del Percio, C.; Pascarelli, M.T.; Noce, G.; Lizio, R.; Da Re, F.; Isella, V.; et al. Late-Onset Epilepsy With Unknown Etiology: A Pilot Study on Neuropsychological Profile, Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers, and Quantitative EEG Characteristics. Front. Neurol. 2020 , 11 , 199. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lam, A.D.; Noebels, J. Night Watch on the Titanic: Detecting Early Signs of Epileptogenesis in Alzheimer Disease. Epilepsy Curr. 2020 , 20 , 369–374. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hahm, J.; Kim, K.K.; Kim, D.W. Seizure-Related Cortical Volume Alterations in Alzheimer’s Disease: A Preliminary Study. J. Epilepsy Res. 2018 , 8 , 33–40. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kaestner, E.; Reyes, A.; Chen, A.; Rao, J.; Macari, A.C.; Choi, J.Y.; Qiu, D.; Hewitt, K.; Wang, Z.I.; Drane, D.L.; et al. Atrophy and cognitive profiles in older adults with temporal lobe epilepsy are similar to mild cognitive impairment. Brain 2021 , 144 , 236–250. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zhang, X.; Li, W.; Shen, W.; Zhang, L.; Pu, X.; Chen, L. (Eds.) Automatic Identification of Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy Based on MRI. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 31st International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI), Portland, OR, USA, 4–6 November 2019; pp. 614–620. [ Google Scholar ]
• Purushotham, M.; Tashrifwala, F.; Jena, R.; Vudugula, S.A.; Patil, R.S.; Agrawal, A. The Association Between Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy: A Narrative Review. Cureus 2022 , 14 , e30195. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Marcus, C.; Mena, E.; Subramaniam, R.M. Brain PET in the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Clin. Nucl. Med. 2014 , 39 , e413–e422, quiz e423–e426. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Colom-Cadena, M.; Spires-Jones, T.; Zetterberg, H.; Blennow, K.; Caggiano, A.; DeKosky, S.T.; Fillit, H.; Harrison, J.E.; Schneider, L.S.; Scheltens, P.; et al. The clinical promise of biomarkers of synapse damage or loss in Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s Res. Ther. 2020 , 12 , 21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Horvath, A.; Kiss, M.; Szucs, A.; Kamondi, A. Precuneus-Dominant Degeneration of Parietal Lobe Is at Risk of Epilepsy in Mild Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Neurol. 2019 , 10 , 878. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Novak, A.; Vizjak, K.; Gacnik, A.; Rakusa, M. Cognitive impairment in people with epilepsy: Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) as a screening tool. Acta Neurol. Belg. 2023 , 123 , 451–456. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Filippov, M.A.; Vorobyov, V.V. Detrimental and synergistic role of epilepsy — Alzheimer’s disease risk factors. Neural Regen. Res. 2019 , 14 , 1376–1377. [ Google Scholar ] [ PubMed ]
• Wu, J.; Zhu, S.; Zhao, C.; Xu, X. A Comprehensive Investigation of Molecular Signatures and Pathways Linking Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy via Bioinformatic Approaches. Curr. Alzheimer Res. 2022 , 19 , 146–160. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Juźwik, C.A.; Drake, S.S.; Zhang, Y.; Paradis-Isler, N.; Sylvester, A.; Amar-Zifkin, A.; Douglas, C.; Morquette, B.; Moore, C.S.; Fournier, A.E. microRNA dysregulation in neurodegenerative diseases: A systematic review. Progress. Neurobiol. 2019 , 182 , 101664. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jiang, X.-w.; Lu, H.-y.; Xu, Z.; Liu, T.-y.; Wu, Q.; Yang, Y.; Zhao, Q.-c.; Gao, H.-y. In Silico Analyses for Key Genes and Molecular Genetic Mechanism in Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease. CNS Neurol. Disord.—Drug Targets 2018 , 17 , 608–617. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Harutyunyan, A.; Jones, N.C.; Kwan, P.; Anderson, A. Network Preservation Analysis Reveals Dysregulated Synaptic Modules and Regulatory Hubs Shared Between Alzheimer’s Disease and Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Front. Genet. 2022 , 13 , 821343. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Vossel, K.A.; Ranasinghe, K.G.; Beagle, A.J.; Mizuiri, D.; Honma, S.M.; Dowling, A.F.; Darwish, S.M.; Van Berlo, V.; Barnes, D.E.; Mantle, M.; et al. Incidence and impact of subclinical epileptiform activity in Alzheimer’s disease. Ann. Neurol. 2016 , 80 , 858–870. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Musaeus, C.S.; Engedal, K.; Høgh, P.; Jelic, V.; Mørup, M.; Naik, M.; Oeksengaard, A.R.; Snaedal, J.; Wahlund, L.O.; Waldemar, G.; et al. EEG Theta Power Is an Early Marker of Cognitive Decline in Dementia due to Alzheimer’s Disease. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2018 , 64 , 1359–1371. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kitchigina, V.F. Alterations of Coherent Theta and Gamma Network Oscillations as an Early Biomarker of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Integr. Neurosci. 2018 , 12 , 36. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Tombini, M.; Boscarino, M.; Di Lazzaro, V. Tackling seizures in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Expert. Rev. Neurother. 2023 , 23 , 1131–1145. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Hautecloque-Raysz, G.; Sellal, F.; Bousiges, O.; Phillipi, N.; Blanc, F.; Cretin, B. Epileptic Prodromal Alzheimer’s Disease Treated with Antiseizure Medications: Medium-Term Outcome of Seizures and Cognition. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2023 , 94 , 1057–1074. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lin, C.Y.; Chang, M.C.; Jhou, H.J. Effect of Levetiracetam on Cognition: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Double-Blind Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials. CNS Drugs 2024 , 38 , 1–14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Vossel, K.; Ranasinghe, K.G.; Beagle, A.J.; La, A.; Ah Pook, K.; Castro, M.; Mizuiri, D.; Honma, S.M.; Venkateswaran, N.; Koestler, M.; et al. Effect of Levetiracetam on Cognition in Patients With Alzheimer Disease With and Without Epileptiform Activity: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2021 , 78 , 1345–1354. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Isla, A.G.; Balleza-Tapia, H.; Chu, F.; Chen, G.; Johansson, J.; Nilsson, P.; Fisahn, A. Low dose of levetiracetam counteracts amyloid β-induced alterations of hippocampal gamma oscillations by restoring fast-spiking interneuron activity. Exp. Neurol. 2023 , 369 , 114545. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vossel, K. Putting the Brakes on Accelerated Cognitive Decline in Alzheimer’s Disease with Epileptic Activity. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2023 , 94 , 1075–1077. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Musaeus, C.S.; Nilsson, C.; Cooper, C.; Kramberger, M.G.; Verdelho, A.; Stefanova, E.; Religa, D.; Waldemar, G.; Frederiksen, K.S. Pharmacological Medical Treatment of Epilepsy in Patients with Dementia: A Systematic Review. Curr. Alzheimer Res. 2021 , 18 , 689–694. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Rohracher, A.; Kalss, G.; Kuchukhidze, G.; Neuray, C.; Leitinger, M.; Höfler, J.; Kreidenhuber, R.; Rossini, F.; Volna, K.; Mauritz, M.; et al. New anti-seizure medication for elderly epilepsy patients — A critical narrative review. Expert. Opin. Pharmacother. 2021 , 22 , 621–634. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zhang, L.; Jiang, H.Y.; Liu, W.J. Anti-seizure medication exposure and the risk of dementia: A meta-analysis of observational studies. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1133816. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dusanter, C.; Houot, M.; Mere, M.; Denos, M.; Samson, S.; Herlin, B.; Navarro, V.; Dupont, S. Cognitive effect of antiseizure medications in medial temporal lobe epilepsy. Eur. J. Neurol. 2023 , 30 , 3692–3702. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Schnier, C.; Duncan, S.; Wilkinson, T.; Mbizvo, G.K.; Chin, R.F.M. A nationwide, retrospective, data-linkage, cohort study of epilepsy and incident dementia. Neurology 2020 , 95 , e1686–e1693. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rayala, H.; Kapur, J.; El-Haija, H.A.; Parikh, P.; Zawar, I. Memantine’s double duty? Investigating its impact on epilepsy control in Alzheimer’s disease. Epileptic Disord. 2024 , 26 , 261–263. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vico Varela, E.; Etter, G.; Williams, S. Excitatory-inhibitory imbalance in Alzheimer’s disease and therapeutic significance. Neurobiol. Dis. 2019 , 127 , 605–615. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gourmaud, S.; Stewart, D.A.; Irwin, D.J.; Roberts, N.; Barbour, A.J.; Eberwine, G.; O’Brien, W.T.; Vassar, R.; Talos, D.M.; Jensen, F.E. The role of mTORC1 activation in seizure-induced exacerbation of Alzheimer’s disease. Brain 2022 , 145 , 324–339. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gourmaud, S.; Shou, H.; Irwin, D.J.; Sansalone, K.; Jacobs, L.M.; Lucas, T.H.; Marsh, E.D.; Davis, K.A.; Jensen, F.E.; Talos, D.M. Alzheimer-like amyloid and tau alterations associated with cognitive deficit in temporal lobe epilepsy. Brain 2020 , 143 , 191–209. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ranasinghe, K.G.; Kudo, K.; Hinkley, L.; Beagle, A.; Lerner, H.; Mizuiri, D.; Findlay, A.; Miller, B.L.; Kramer, J.H.; Gorno-Tempini, M.L.; et al. Neuronal synchrony abnormalities associated with subclinical epileptiform activity in early-onset Alzheimer’s disease. Brain 2022 , 145 , 744–753. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• He, M.; Kolesar, T.A.; Goertzen, A.L.; Ng, M.C.; Ko, J.H. Do Epilepsy Patients with Cognitive Impairment Have Alzheimer’s Disease-like Brain Metabolism? Biomedicines 2023 , 11 , 1108. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Fernandes, M.; Manfredi, N.; Aluisantonio, L.; Franchini, F.; Chiaravalloti, A.; Izzi, F.; Di Santo, S.; Schillaci, O.; Mercuri, N.B.; Placidi, F.; et al. Cognitive functioning, cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers and cerebral glucose metabolism in late-onset epilepsy of unknown aetiology: A prospective study. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2022 , 56 , 5384–5396. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zhang, X.; Ahmed, R.; Thayer, Z.; Breen, N.; McMillan, J.; Fulham, M.; Nikpour, A. Late-onset epilepsy with cognitive symptoms: Comparison of cognitive and imaging profiles with probable Alzheimer’s disease. Epilepsy Behav. 2023 , 146 , 109371. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Kalyvas, A.-C.; Dimitriou, M.; Ioannidis, P.; Grigoriadis, N.; Afrantou, T. Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy: Exploring Shared Pathways and Promising Biomarkers for Future Treatments. J. Clin. Med. 2024 , 13 , 3879. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133879

Kalyvas A-C, Dimitriou M, Ioannidis P, Grigoriadis N, Afrantou T. Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy: Exploring Shared Pathways and Promising Biomarkers for Future Treatments. Journal of Clinical Medicine . 2024; 13(13):3879. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133879

Kalyvas, Athanasios-Christos, Maria Dimitriou, Panagiotis Ioannidis, Nikolaos Grigoriadis, and Theodora Afrantou. 2024. "Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy: Exploring Shared Pathways and Promising Biomarkers for Future Treatments" Journal of Clinical Medicine 13, no. 13: 3879. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133879

Article Metrics

Further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

7 reasons Nvidia is poised to soar 67% as its rally continues for the next 2 years, according to a Wall Street research firm

• Constellation Research said Nvidia stock will soar 65% to $200 per share over the next year.
• The research firm said it expects Nvidia stock to continue soaring for the next 18 to 24 months as it benefits from its AI dominance.
• There are seven moats around Nvidia's business that will enable continued growth. 

Nvidia stock will surge to $200 per share over the next 12 months, and its ongoing rally is set to last up to another two years, according to Constellation Research.

Constellation founder R "Ray" Wang told CNBC on Monday that he believes Nvidia has seven moats that will help it maintain its dominant position in the market for GPUs that are fueling the AI boom.

"Nvidia is the foundational stock in the Age of AI. CEO Jensen Huang intends to achieve vertically integrated domination from silicon to software through partnerships and direct routes to market. Unlike the PC age where Microsoft, Intel, and Cisco served as a triumvirate foundational players, this new era will have new players all tied back to Nvidia," Wang told Business Insider in an e-mail on Monday.

These are the seven reasons Wang expects Nvidia stock to soar 65% from current levels.

1. Visionary founder-led CEO

"It's a visionary-led CEO, and that's very very important as you've seen in the valley. Those are the ones that have led, like the Larry Ellisons of the world, the scott Mcnealys, the Mark Zuckerbergs," Wang said.

2. High barrier to entry

"There's few competitors that can come into this chip market, and it takes a long time to get a chip to market, and if you can do that and if you succeed and then if you can actually get the right chip, that's a very hard thing to do."

3. High switching costs

"Once you're in, you're locked in because of the CUDA software and all the access to the chips, the software, and the entire stack. You're going to be locked in for quite some time and they've got quite a lead in terms of doing that."

4. Dominant market share

"Nvidia has had dominant market share, and I think that makes a big difference because they've been in this market for quite some time and the competitors are behind by 24 months."

5. Strong product roadmap

"We're only seeing one-tenth, maybe one-one hundredth of the product roadmap that Nvidia has out there, and that's really exciting for those who actually have some insight into what they have next, because it's more than just chips, and it's more than just what's happening in software. That ability to go from silicon all the way to the end side, that's where we're going to see a lot of the innovation."

6. GPU is the default standard in AI

"The ecosystem has made the GPU a default standard. It's the standard everyone's looking to for AI from inference and testing."

7. The numbers don't lie

"We're seeing some amazing growth here that actually matches the P/E ratio, and that's what everyone is looking at, they're trying to figure out how this is going to continue, but gross margins are 78%, 262% growth compared to a year ago, this is going to continue for at least the next 18 to 24 months."

Wang said the current 14% decline in the stock since it peaked at about $140 per share last week represents yet another buying opportunity for investors.

"The pullback is coming at a macro level. People are worried about the consumer side, people worried about where the economy is going to head, and they're doing some profit-taking before the summer, so I think it's a good time to buy the dip," Wang said.

Wang isn't the only analyst on Wall Street with a $200 price target for Nvidia stock.

Last week, Rosenblatt raised its Nvidia price target to $200 per share on the prospect of the company better monetizing its CUDA software platform.

• Main content

share this!

June 24, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

New research challenges black holes as dark matter explanation

by University of Warsaw

The gravitational wave detectors LIGO and Virgo have detected a population of massive black holes whose origin is one of the biggest mysteries in modern astronomy. According to one hypothesis, these objects may have formed in the very early universe and may include dark matter, a mysterious substance filling the universe.

A team of scientists from the OGLE (Optical Gravitational Lensing Experiment) survey from the Astronomical Observatory of the University of Warsaw have announced the results of nearly 20-year-long observations indicating that such massive black holes may comprise at most a few percent of dark matter . Another explanation, therefore, is needed for gravitational wave sources. The results of the research were published in a study in Nature and a study in The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series .

Various astronomical observations indicate that ordinary matter, which we can see or touch, comprises only 5% of the total mass and energy budget of the universe. In the Milky Way, for every 1 kg of ordinary matter in stars, there is 15 kg of dark matter, which does not emit any light and interacts only by means of its gravitational pull.

"The nature of dark matter remains a mystery. Most scientists think it is composed of unknown elementary particles," says Dr. Przemek Mr.óz from the Astronomical Observatory, University of Warsaw, the lead author of both articles. "Unfortunately, despite decades of efforts, no experiment (including experiments carried out with the Large Hadron Collider) has found new particles that could be responsible for dark matter."

Since the first detection of gravitational waves from a merging pair of black holes in 2015, the LIGO and Virgo experiments have detected more than 90 such events. Astronomers noticed that black holes detected by LIGO and Virgo are typically significantly more massive (20–100 solar masses) than those known previously in the Milky Way (5–20 solar masses).

"Explaining why these two populations of black holes are so different is one of the biggest mysteries of modern astronomy," says Dr. Mr.óz.

One possible explanation postulates that LIGO and Virgo detectors have uncovered a population of primordial black holes that may have formed in the very early universe. Their existence was first proposed over 50 years ago by British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking, and independently, by the Soviet physicist Yakov Zeldovich.

"We know that the early universe was not ideally homogeneous—small density fluctuations gave rise to current galaxies and galaxy clusters," says Dr. Mr.óz. "Similar density fluctuations, if they exceed a critical density contrast, may collapse and form black holes."

Since the first detection of gravitational waves, more and more scientists have been speculating that such primordial black holes may comprise a significant fraction, if not all, of dark matter.

Fortunately, this hypothesis can be verified with astronomical observations. We observe that copious amounts of dark matter exist in the Milky Way. If it were composed of black holes, we should be able to detect them in our cosmic neighborhood. Is this possible, given that black holes do not emit any detectable light?

According to Einstein's theory of general relativity, light may be bent and deflected in the gravitational field of massive objects, a phenomenon called gravitational microlensing .

"Microlensing occurs when three objects—an observer on Earth, a source of light, and a lens—virtually ideally align in space," says Prof. Andrzej Udalski, the principal investigator of the OGLE survey. "During a microlensing event, the source's light may be deflected and magnified, and we observe a temporary brightening of the source's light."

The duration of the brightening depends on the mass of the lensing object: the higher the mass, the longer the event. Microlensing events by solar mass objects typically last several weeks, whereas those by black holes that are 100 times more massive than the sun would last a few years.

The idea of using gravitational microlensing to study dark matter is not new. It was first proposed in the 1980s by Polish astrophysicist Bohdan Paczyński. His idea inspired the start of three major experiments: Polish OGLE, American MACHO, and French EROS. The first results from these experiments demonstrated that black holes less massive than one solar mass may comprise less than 10% of dark matter. These observations were not, however, sensitive to extremely long-timescale microlensing events, and therefore, not sensitive to massive black holes, similar to those recently detected with gravitational-wave detectors.

In the new article in The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series , OGLE astronomers present the results of nearly 20-year-long photometric monitoring of almost 80 million stars located in a nearby galaxy, called the Large Magellanic Cloud, and the searches for gravitational microlensing events. The analyzed data was collected during the third and fourth phases of the OGLE project from 2001 to 2020.

"This data set provides the longest, largest, and most accurate photometric observations of stars in the Large Magellanic Cloud in the history of modern astronomy," says Prof. Udalski.

The second article, published in Nature , discusses the astrophysical consequences of the findings.

"If the entire dark matter in the Milky Way was composed of black holes of 10 solar masses, we should have detected 258 microlensing events," says Dr. Mr.óz. "For 100 solar mass black holes, we expected 99 microlensing events. For 1,000 solar mass black holes—27 microlensing events."

In contrast, the OGLE astronomers have found only 13 microlensing events. Their detailed analysis demonstrates that all of them can be explained by the known stellar populations in the Milky Way or the Large Magellanic Cloud itself, not by black holes.

"That indicates that massive black holes can compose at most a few percent of dark matter," says Dr. Mr.óz.

The detailed calculations demonstrate that black holes of 10 solar masses may comprise at most 1.2% of dark matter, 100 solar mass black holes—3.0% of dark matter, and 1,000 solar mass black holes—11% of dark matter.

"Our observations indicate that primordial black holes cannot comprise a significant fraction of the dark matter, and simultaneously, explain the observed black hole merger rates measured by LIGO and Virgo," says Prof. Udalski.

Therefore, other explanations are needed for massive black holes detected by LIGO and Virgo. According to one hypothesis, they formed as a product of the evolution of massive, low-metallicity stars. Another possibility involves mergers of less massive objects in dense stellar environments, such as globular clusters.

"Our results will remain in astronomy textbooks for decades to come," adds Prof. Udalski.

Przemek Mróz et al, Microlensing Optical Depth and Event Rate toward the Large Magellanic Cloud Based on 20 yr of OGLE Observations, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series (2024). DOI: 10.3847/1538-4365/ad452e

Journal information: arXiv , Nature

Provided by University of Warsaw

Explore further

Feedback to editors

A desert moss that has the potential to grow on Mars

8 minutes ago

Giant clams may hold the answers to making solar energy more efficient

Scientists sequence entire genome of Australian bilby

Astronomers discover a peculiar radio galaxy

Scientists show that Urm1 protects proteins in stress situations

'Motion-picture' method reveals shape of the Milky Way's dark matter halo

20 minutes ago

Quail imaging offers insights into congenital birth defects

24 minutes ago

Can a computer chip have zero energy loss in 1.58 dimensions?

53 minutes ago

Researchers thwart resistant bacteria's strategy

Research shows Darwin and Wallace both right on butterfly evolution

4 hours ago

Relevant PhysicsForums posts

Questions about dark matter/energy.

Jun 30, 2024

Galaxies as systems extended from the solar system

Jun 28, 2024

Early Universe massive Black Holes question

Jun 26, 2024

Interstellar navigation to Proxima B with an unmanned probe

Jun 25, 2024

Some photos of Antares and Sigma Sagittarii (Nunki)

Jun 23, 2024

Why is the CNO Cycle considered catalytic in stellar nucleosynthesis?

More from Astronomy and Astrophysics

Related Stories

Primordial black holes can only explain a fraction of dark matter, research suggests

Jun 6, 2024

Astrophysicists set constraints on compact dark matter from gravitational wave microlensing

Apr 1, 2022

The universe could be filled with ultralight black holes that can't die

May 6, 2024

How NASA's Roman mission will hunt for primordial black holes

May 7, 2024

Quest for source of black hole dark matter

Aug 14, 2018

Did black holes form immediately after the Big Bang?

Dec 17, 2021

Recommended for you

The Milky Way's eROSITA bubbles are large and distant

Jun 29, 2024

Tiny bright objects discovered at dawn of universe baffle scientists

Astronomers discover two new Milky Way satellite galaxy candidates

Gravitational wave researchers cast new light on Antikythera mechanism mystery

Jun 27, 2024

Study determines stellar mass and origin of a protostellar system

The density difference of sub-Neptunes finally deciphered

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

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
• Indian J Crit Care Med
• v.23(Suppl 3); 2019 Sep

An Introduction to Statistics: Understanding Hypothesis Testing and Statistical Errors

Priya ranganathan.

1 Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

2 Department of Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

The second article in this series on biostatistics covers the concepts of sample, population, research hypotheses and statistical errors.

How to cite this article

Ranganathan P, Pramesh CS. An Introduction to Statistics: Understanding Hypothesis Testing and Statistical Errors. Indian J Crit Care Med 2019;23(Suppl 3):S230–S231.

Two papers quoted in this issue of the Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine report. The results of studies aim to prove that a new intervention is better than (superior to) an existing treatment. In the ABLE study, the investigators wanted to show that transfusion of fresh red blood cells would be superior to standard-issue red cells in reducing 90-day mortality in ICU patients. 1 The PROPPR study was designed to prove that transfusion of a lower ratio of plasma and platelets to red cells would be superior to a higher ratio in decreasing 24-hour and 30-day mortality in critically ill patients. 2 These studies are known as superiority studies (as opposed to noninferiority or equivalence studies which will be discussed in a subsequent article).

SAMPLE VERSUS POPULATION

A sample represents a group of participants selected from the entire population. Since studies cannot be carried out on entire populations, researchers choose samples, which are representative of the population. This is similar to walking into a grocery store and examining a few grains of rice or wheat before purchasing an entire bag; we assume that the few grains that we select (the sample) are representative of the entire sack of grains (the population).

The results of the study are then extrapolated to generate inferences about the population. We do this using a process known as hypothesis testing. This means that the results of the study may not always be identical to the results we would expect to find in the population; i.e., there is the possibility that the study results may be erroneous.

HYPOTHESIS TESTING

A clinical trial begins with an assumption or belief, and then proceeds to either prove or disprove this assumption. In statistical terms, this belief or assumption is known as a hypothesis. Counterintuitively, what the researcher believes in (or is trying to prove) is called the “alternate” hypothesis, and the opposite is called the “null” hypothesis; every study has a null hypothesis and an alternate hypothesis. For superiority studies, the alternate hypothesis states that one treatment (usually the new or experimental treatment) is superior to the other; the null hypothesis states that there is no difference between the treatments (the treatments are equal). For example, in the ABLE study, we start by stating the null hypothesis—there is no difference in mortality between groups receiving fresh RBCs and standard-issue RBCs. We then state the alternate hypothesis—There is a difference between groups receiving fresh RBCs and standard-issue RBCs. It is important to note that we have stated that the groups are different, without specifying which group will be better than the other. This is known as a two-tailed hypothesis and it allows us to test for superiority on either side (using a two-sided test). This is because, when we start a study, we are not 100% certain that the new treatment can only be better than the standard treatment—it could be worse, and if it is so, the study should pick it up as well. One tailed hypothesis and one-sided statistical testing is done for non-inferiority studies, which will be discussed in a subsequent paper in this series.

STATISTICAL ERRORS

There are two possibilities to consider when interpreting the results of a superiority study. The first possibility is that there is truly no difference between the treatments but the study finds that they are different. This is called a Type-1 error or false-positive error or alpha error. This means falsely rejecting the null hypothesis.

The second possibility is that there is a difference between the treatments and the study does not pick up this difference. This is called a Type 2 error or false-negative error or beta error. This means falsely accepting the null hypothesis.

The power of the study is the ability to detect a difference between groups and is the converse of the beta error; i.e., power = 1-beta error. Alpha and beta errors are finalized when the protocol is written and form the basis for sample size calculation for the study. In an ideal world, we would not like any error in the results of our study; however, we would need to do the study in the entire population (infinite sample size) to be able to get a 0% alpha and beta error. These two errors enable us to do studies with realistic sample sizes, with the compromise that there is a small possibility that the results may not always reflect the truth. The basis for this will be discussed in a subsequent paper in this series dealing with sample size calculation.

Conventionally, type 1 or alpha error is set at 5%. This means, that at the end of the study, if there is a difference between groups, we want to be 95% certain that this is a true difference and allow only a 5% probability that this difference has occurred by chance (false positive). Type 2 or beta error is usually set between 10% and 20%; therefore, the power of the study is 90% or 80%. This means that if there is a difference between groups, we want to be 80% (or 90%) certain that the study will detect that difference. For example, in the ABLE study, sample size was calculated with a type 1 error of 5% (two-sided) and power of 90% (type 2 error of 10%) (1).

Table 1 gives a summary of the two types of statistical errors with an example

Statistical errors

In the next article in this series, we will look at the meaning and interpretation of ‘ p ’ value and confidence intervals for hypothesis testing.

Source of support: Nil

Conflict of interest: None

The Army Is Back in the Ship Killin’ Business

A tradition as old as time.

• The U.S. Army’s new long range tactical missile sank a moving target during exercise Valiant Shield.
• This sinking marks the reintroduction of anti-ship weaponry into the Army’s vast arsenal.
• The capability to sink ships is part of the Army’s effort to become relevant in a war with China.

PrSM Strike

The strike took place towards the end of the biennial Valiant Shield multinational military exercises. Valiant Shield takes place during even-numbered years across the northern Mariana Islands, including the island of Guam, Palau, and the Mariana Island Complex. The exercises bring together the armed forces of several countries, including the United States, Japan, the Philippines, and Australia.

The strike took place on June 18th. The ex-amphibious transport dock USS Cleveland was struck by an Army Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) 40 nautical miles from land. Exercises in which decommissioned ships are attacked are known as SINKEXs, or sinking exercises. Typically, several weapons—including submarine torpedoes , anti-ship missiles, helicopter-mounted weapons, and others—are brought to bear on a decommissioned ship during a SINKEX. This allows troops to gain experience firing live weapons and allows the services to study the damage specific weapons do to ships, sometimes for the first time.

The PrSM strike was carried out by the robotic, unmanned version of the HIMARS rocket truck known as the Autonomous Multidomain Launcher, which is operated by 1-181 Artillery, Tennessee Army National Guard. PrSM is a new tactical missile, designed to replace the Cold War-era Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), and is designed to attack enemy targets in all weather conditions at ranges in excess of 310 miles—a distance previously made off-limits by the U.S.-Russian Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty. The U.S. left the treaty in 2019 after accusing Russia of cheating and fielding long-range cruise missiles .

PrSM, like ATACMs, is designed to attack ground targets in the enemy’s rear, with a particular emphasis on time sensitive, moving, hardened, or fleeing targets. The missile is fired from the Army’s M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System, a heavy tracked rocket carrier, and the wheeled M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, or HIMARS . A HIMARS rocket truck can carry one ATACMS missile at a time, but two PrSM missiles at the same time.

Above is a video made by PrSM’s manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, outlining how the missile works. In the video, PrSM kicks the door down for a F-35 air strike, targeting radars and surface to air missile launchers defending the target. This sort of operation is known as a multi-domain operation, and involves forces from the air and land domains to work together to carry out a common mission. Theoretically, multi-domain operations allow services to bring their own unique strengths to a mission and increse the probability of success.

In a press release , the Navy emphasized that the target ship was stripped of all chemical contaminants beforehand, describing ex-USS Cleveland as “environmentally clean.” Any target involved in a SINKEX is guaranteed to be sent to the bottom by the combined firepower of the exercise participants, and the Navy does not want pollution allegations to come back to haunt them.

The Return of the Coast Artillery

The U.S. Army has historically maintained America’s shore-based anti-ship defenses. Fort Montgomery and Fort Clinton in the Revolutionary War, Fort McHenry during the War of 1812, and the Confederate Fort Sumter during the Civil War were all manned by U.S. Army or Confederate troops (the guns were typically operated by members of the artillery branch). In 1901, the Army established the Coastal Artillery Corps —part of the Artillery branch—which manned coastal artillery guns and harbor defenses.

The Coastal Artillery Corps was disbanded in 1950, after the primacy of the U.S. Navy and its ability to meet the enemy at sea made the Army’s land-based forces obsolete . For the next 73 years, the Army was without a specific capability to attack ships. All of that changed in 2023, when the service accepted its first PrSM missile .

The Search for Relevance

The rise of the Chinese military, as well as Chinese aggression in the Western Pacific, has made a new war in the Indo-Pacific a distinct possibility. The region is dominated by the Eurasian landmass and the vastness of the Indian and Pacific Oceans. The specific areas in which China is currently trying to expand its territory—the East and South China Seas—feature very small islets, atolls, and other tiny land features bordered by major islands, including the Philippines, Japan, and other Pacific nations.

The lack of land is a problem, as the U.S. Army tries to figure out how it would contribute to a Pacific War. The Army has no amphibious forces, so seizing these small islands from an enemy would naturally go to the Marine Corps . The Army has instead decided it would contribute through brigade-sized units of long-range air defense forces and artillery units that it calls Multi-Domain Task Forces (MDTFs) , which can make life unpleasant for enemy forces within the range of their weapons. MDTFs—along with submarines, aircraft carriers, Marines, and Air Force fighters and bombers—would flood a combat zone and restrict an enemy’s ability to maneuver, conduct ambushes, and push forward into formarly occupied territory.

PrSm’s anti-ship capability is part of this scheme. Once a MDTF occupies an island, it makes an instant no-go zone with a 310 mile radius for enemy ships and aircraft . As a result, any opponent must expend the resources to suppress the MDTF or accept the risk of losing ships. If they choses the former, other air and sea forces could take advantage of the situation to hit vulnerable forces.

On one hand, the Army fielding anti-ship missiles feels like a duplication of the efforts of the Navy, Marine Corps, and the Air Force . On the other hand, excluding the Army from a future Pacific War might be a mistake, as it could limit the depth of U.S. forces available to respond to a crisis. PrSM allows the Army to create a 620-mile-wide protective bubble across the Pacific—a powerful capability that will only grow stronger as the PrSM adds range and further capabilities.

Kyle Mizokami is a writer on defense and security issues and has been at Popular Mechanics since 2015. If it involves explosions or projectiles, he's generally in favor of it. Kyle’s articles have appeared at The Daily Beast, U.S. Naval Institute News, The Diplomat, Foreign Policy, Combat Aircraft Monthly, VICE News , and others. He lives in San Francisco.

.css-cuqpxl:before{padding-right:0.3125rem;content:'//';display:inline;} Pop Mech Pro .css-xtujxj:before{padding-left:0.3125rem;content:'//';display:inline;}

Work-Holding Hacks

Let’s Talk About Triple Cannons

The World’s Most Powerful Tank is European

Charred Scroll Explains Plato’s Final Night

America’s Cruisers are Sailing into the Sunset

Can Young Blood Transfusions Really Reverse Aging?

Human Consciousness Is an Illusion, Scientists Say

Ship from Famous Explorer's Final Journey Found

Japan Follows U.S. in Investigating UAP Sightings

Treasure May Be Hidden Amongst Terracotta Army

The Air Force's NGAD Fighter Might Be Dead

UCL Mathematical & Physical Sciences

• News and events
• Departments
• About the Faculty
• Innovation & Enterprise
• Equity (EDI)

Exploring the importance of International Asteroid Day

Why should we care about asteroids? Our student Mayukh answers this question and talks about space research in the blog marking International Asteroid Day.

30 June 2024

Amidst black holes, quasars, and the Big Bang, something equally intriguing caught my attention as I studied the module, “Modern Physics, Astronomy and Cosmology” at UCL: asteroids. Yep, those seemingly harmless space rocks have a lot more going on than meets the eye.  Enter International Asteroid Day , a global initiative that aims to raise public awareness about the potential hazards of asteroid impacts and inform us about what to do in case a near-Earth Object (NEO) decides to pay us an uninvited visit. Why should we care about asteroids? Asteroids might sound like the stuff of sci-fi movies, but they’re very real and can pose serious risks to our planet. These space rocks range from tiny pebbles to giant boulders stretching several kilometres.  While most hang out in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, some take a detour and head our way due to gravitational interactions with planets or other asteroids, altering their orbits. And when they do, they can cause quite a ruckus. Remember the dinosaurs? Their untimely demise 66 million years ago was partly thanks to a massive asteroid impact. More recently, in 2013, a small asteroid exploded over Chelyabinsk, Russia, injuring over 1,000 people. So, understanding these threats isn’t just for scientists — it’s for all of us. What’s International Asteroid Day all about? International Asteroid Day,  marked each year on 30 June, is like humanity’s annual wake-up call about asteroids. This date marks the anniversary of the Tunguska event in 1908, when an asteroid flattened about 80 million trees in Siberia. That’s a pretty big hint that we should take these things seriously. This day brings together experts from around the globe — astronomers, physicists, disaster management pros — to share their knowledge and strategies for spotting and dealing with potential threats. It’s a chance for all of us to get clued up on what’s out there and what we can do about it. Teamwork makes the dream work One of the coolest things I’ve learned in my studies with UCL Physics and Astronomy is how international cooperation is at the heart of space research. Agencies like NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) aren’t just staring at the stars — they’re working tirelessly to keep us safe. Using advanced telescopes, satellites, and radar systems, they track asteroids and predict their paths. If a threat is detected, these organisations have detailed plans to inform the public and coordinate a response. Think of it as a global neighbourhood watch, but for space rocks. They’ve even got plans for deflecting or destroying dangerous asteroids, just in case. The future of space defence Despite all the progress, we can’t afford to sit back and relax. Continuous research and investment in space technology are essential. Take NASA’s DART (Double Asteroid Redirection Test) mission, for instance. Launched in November 2021, DART successfully demonstrated the ability to change the orbit of an asteroid in September 2022 by crashing into the moonlet Dimorphos of the asteroid Didymos. This historic achievement proved that with the right technology, we can alter the path of an asteroid and potentially prevent a catastrophic impact on Earth. Pretty cool, right? My studies have shown me how interconnected and collaborative space research is. It’s a field that needs global cooperation, constant learning, and public support. Through initiatives like International Asteroid Day, we can help ensure these efforts get the attention and funding they deserve. Whether you’re a student like me, a space enthusiast, or just curious about the cosmos, there’s always more to discover and contribute. International Asteroid Day isn’t just about acknowledging a potential threat — it’s about celebrating our collective achievements in protecting our planet and inspiring future generations. Let’s stay curious, stay informed, and stay prepared. After all, the universe is a big place, and who knows what’s out there waiting to be discovered? Mayukh Das MSci Chemistry student (Department of Chemistry)

Keep up to date:

Funnelback feed: https://cms-feed.ucl.ac.uk/s/search.json?collection=drupal-mathematical-... Double click the feed URL above to edit