non directional hypothesis psychology definition

Research Hypothesis In Psychology: Types, & Examples

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

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

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

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

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

On This Page:

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

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

Some key points about hypotheses:

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

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

Types of Research Hypotheses

Alternative hypothesis.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Null Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

Nondirectional Hypothesis

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

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

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

Directional Hypothesis

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

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

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

Falsifiability

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

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

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

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

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

Can a Hypothesis be Proven?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to Write a Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

More Examples

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

Related Articles

Research Methodology

What Is a Focus Group?

Cross-Cultural Research Methodology In Psychology

What Is Internal Validity In Research?

Research Methodology , Statistics

What Is Face Validity In Research? Importance & How To Measure

Criterion Validity: Definition & Examples

Convergent Validity: Definition and Examples

Aims And Hypotheses, Directional And Non-Directional

March 7, 2021 - paper 2 psychology in context | research methods.

• Back to Paper 2 - Research Methods

In Psychology, hypotheses are predictions made by the researcher about the outcome of a study. The research can chose to make a specific prediction about what they feel will happen in their research (a directional hypothesis) or they can make a ‘general,’ ‘less specific’ prediction about the outcome of their research (a non-directional hypothesis). The type of prediction that a researcher makes is usually dependent on whether or not any previous research has also investigated their research aim.

Variables Recap:

The  independent variable  (IV)  is the variable that psychologists  manipulate/change  to see if changing this variable has an effect on the  depen dent variable  (DV).

The  dependent variable (DV)  is the variable that the psychologists  measures  (to see if the IV has had an effect).

It is important that the only variable that is changed in research is the  independent variable (IV),   all other variables have to be kept constant across the control condition and the experimental conditions. Only then will researchers be able to observe the true effects of  just  the independent variable (IV) on the dependent variable (DV).

Research/Experimental Aim(S):

An aim is a clear and precise statement of the purpose of the study. It is a statement of why a research study is taking place. This should include what is being studied and what the study is trying to achieve. (e.g. “This study aims to investigate the effects of alcohol on reaction times”.

It is important that aims created in research are realistic and ethical.

Hypotheses:

This is a testable statement that predicts what the researcher expects to happen in their research. The research study itself is therefore a means of testing whether or not the hypothesis is supported by the findings. If the findings do support the hypothesis then the hypothesis can be retained (i.e., accepted), but if not, then it must be rejected.

Three Different Hypotheses:

We're not around right now. But you can send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Start typing and press Enter to search

Cookie Policy - Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy

psychologyrocks

Hypotheses; directional and non-directional, what is the difference between an experimental and an alternative hypothesis.

Nothing much! If the study is a laboratory experiment then we can call the hypothesis “an experimental hypothesis”, where we make a prediction about how the IV causes an effect on the DV. If we have a non-experimental design, i.e. we are not able to manipulate the IV as in a natural or quasi-experiment , or if some other research method has been used, then we call it an “alternativehypothesis”, alternative to the null.

Directional hypothesis: A directional (or one tailed hypothesis) states which way you think the results are going to go, for example in an experimental study we might say…”Participants who have been deprived of sleep for 24 hours will have more cold symptoms in the following week after exposure to a virus than participants who have not been sleep deprived”; the hypothesis compares the two groups/conditions and states which one will ….have more/less, be quicker/slower, etc.

If we had a correlational study, the directional hypothesis would state whether we expect a positive or a negative correlation, we are stating how the two variables will be related to each other, e.g. there will be a positive correlation between the number of stressful life events experienced in the last year and the number of coughs and colds suffered, whereby the more life events you have suffered the more coughs and cold you will have had”. The directional hypothesis can also state a negative correlation, e.g. the higher the number of face-book friends, the lower the life satisfaction score “

Non-directional hypothesis: A non-directional (or two tailed hypothesis) simply states that there will be a difference between the two groups/conditions but does not say which will be greater/smaller, quicker/slower etc. Using our example above we would say “There will be a difference between the number of cold symptoms experienced in the following week after exposure to a virus for those participants who have been sleep deprived for 24 hours compared with those who have not been sleep deprived for 24 hours.”

When the study is correlational, we simply state that variables will be correlated but do not state whether the relationship will be positive or negative, e.g. there will be a significant correlation between variable A and variable B.

Null hypothesis The null hypothesis states that the alternative or experimental hypothesis is NOT the case, if your experimental hypothesis was directional you would say…

Participants who have been deprived of sleep for 24 hours will NOT have more cold symptoms in the following week after exposure to a virus than participants who have not been sleep deprived and any difference that does arise will be due to chance alone.

or with a directional correlational hypothesis….

There will NOT be a positive correlation between the number of stress life events experienced in the last year and the number of coughs and colds suffered, whereby the more life events you have suffered the more coughs and cold you will have had”

With a non-directional or  two tailed hypothesis…

There will be NO difference between the number of cold symptoms experienced in the following week after exposure to a virus for those participants who have been sleep deprived for 24 hours compared with those who have not been sleep deprived for 24 hours.

or for a correlational …

there will be NO correlation between variable A and variable B.

When it comes to conducting an inferential stats test, if you have a directional hypothesis , you must do a one tailed test to find out whether your observed value is significant. If you have a non-directional hypothesis , you must do a two tailed test .

Exam Techniques/Advice

• Remember, a decent hypothesis will contain two variables, in the case of an experimental hypothesis there will be an IV and a DV; in a correlational hypothesis there will be two co-variables
• both variables need to be fully operationalised to score the marks, that is you need to be very clear and specific about what you mean by your IV and your DV; if someone wanted to repeat your study, they should be able to look at your hypothesis and know exactly what to change between the two groups/conditions and exactly what to measure (including any units/explanation of rating scales etc, e.g. “where 1 is low and 7 is high”)
• double check the question, did it ask for a directional or non-directional hypothesis?
• if you were asked for a null hypothesis, make sure you always include the phrase “and any difference/correlation (is your study experimental or correlational?) that does arise will be due to chance alone”

Practice Questions:

• Mr Faraz wants to compare the levels of attendance between his psychology group and those of Mr Simon, who teaches a different psychology group. Which of the following is a suitable directional (one tailed) hypothesis for Mr Faraz’s investigation?

A There will be a difference in the levels of attendance between the two psychology groups.

B Students’ level of attendance will be higher in Mr Faraz’s group than Mr Simon’s group.

C Any difference in the levels of attendance between the two psychology groups is due to chance.

D The level of attendance of the students will depend upon who is teaching the groups.

2. Tracy works for the local council. The council is thinking about reducing the number of people it employs to pick up litter from the street. Tracy has been asked to carry out a study to see if having the streets cleaned at less regular intervals will affect the amount of litter the public will drop. She studies a street to compare how much litter is dropped at two different times, once when it has just been cleaned and once after it has not been cleaned for a month.

Write a fully operationalised non-directional (two-tailed) hypothesis for Tracy’s study. (2)

3. Jamila is conducting a practical investigation to look at gender differences in carrying out visuo-spatial tasks. She decides to give males and females a jigsaw puzzle and will time them to see who completes it the fastest. She uses a random sample of pupils from a local school to get her participants.

(a) Write a fully operationalised directional (one tailed) hypothesis for Jamila’s study. (2) (b) Outline one strength and one weakness of the random sampling method. You may refer to Jamila’s use of this type of sampling in your answer. (4)

4. Which of the following is a non-directional (two tailed) hypothesis?

A There is a difference in driving ability with men being better drivers than women

B Women are better at concentrating on more than one thing at a time than men

C Women spend more time doing the cooking and cleaning than men

D There is a difference in the number of men and women who participate in sports

Revision Activity

writing-hypotheses-revision-sheet

Quizizz link for teachers: https://quizizz.com/admin/quiz/5bf03f51add785001bc5a09e

Share this:

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Directional and non-directional hypothesis: A Comprehensive Guide

Karolina Konopka

Customer support manager

In the world of research and statistical analysis, hypotheses play a crucial role in formulating and testing scientific claims. Understanding the differences between directional and non-directional hypothesis is essential for designing sound experiments and drawing accurate conclusions. Whether you’re a student, researcher, or simply curious about the foundations of hypothesis testing, this guide will equip you with the knowledge and tools to navigate this fundamental aspect of scientific inquiry.

Understanding Directional Hypothesis

Understanding directional hypotheses is crucial for conducting hypothesis-driven research, as they guide the selection of appropriate statistical tests and aid in the interpretation of results. By incorporating directional hypotheses, researchers can make more precise predictions, contribute to scientific knowledge, and advance their fields of study.

Definition of directional hypothesis

Directional hypotheses, also known as one-tailed hypotheses, are statements in research that make specific predictions about the direction of a relationship or difference between variables. Unlike non-directional hypotheses, which simply state that there is a relationship or difference without specifying its direction, directional hypotheses provide a focused and precise expectation.

A directional hypothesis predicts either a positive or negative relationship between variables or predicts that one group will perform better than another. It asserts a specific direction of effect or outcome. For example, a directional hypothesis could state that “increased exposure to sunlight will lead to an improvement in mood” or “participants who receive the experimental treatment will exhibit higher levels of cognitive performance compared to the control group.”

Directional hypotheses are formulated based on existing theory, prior research, or logical reasoning, and they guide the researcher’s expectations and analysis. They allow for more targeted predictions and enable researchers to test specific hypotheses using appropriate statistical tests.

The role of directional hypothesis in research

Directional hypotheses also play a significant role in research surveys. Let’s explore their role specifically in the context of survey research:

• Objective-driven surveys : Directional hypotheses help align survey research with specific objectives. By formulating directional hypotheses, researchers can focus on gathering data that directly addresses the predicted relationship or difference between variables of interest.
• Question design and measurement : Directional hypotheses guide the design of survey question types and the selection of appropriate measurement scales. They ensure that the questions are tailored to capture the specific aspects related to the predicted direction, enabling researchers to obtain more targeted and relevant data from survey respondents.
• Data analysis and interpretation : Directional hypotheses assist in data analysis by directing researchers towards appropriate statistical tests and methods. Researchers can analyze the survey data to specifically test the predicted relationship or difference, enhancing the accuracy and reliability of their findings. The results can then be interpreted within the context of the directional hypothesis, providing more meaningful insights.
• Practical implications and decision-making : Directional hypotheses in surveys often have practical implications. When the predicted relationship or difference is confirmed, it informs decision-making processes, program development, or interventions. The survey findings based on directional hypotheses can guide organizations, policymakers, or practitioners in making informed choices to achieve desired outcomes.
• Replication and further research : Directional hypotheses in survey research contribute to the replication and extension of studies. Researchers can replicate the survey with different populations or contexts to assess the generalizability of the predicted relationships. Furthermore, if the directional hypothesis is supported, it encourages further research to explore underlying mechanisms or boundary conditions.

By incorporating directional hypotheses in survey research, researchers can align their objectives, design effective surveys, conduct focused data analysis, and derive practical insights. They provide a framework for organizing survey research and contribute to the accumulation of knowledge in the field.

Examples of research questions for directional hypothesis

Here are some examples of research questions that lend themselves to directional hypotheses:

• Does increased daily exercise lead to a decrease in body weight among sedentary adults?
• Is there a positive relationship between study hours and academic performance among college students?
• Does exposure to violent video games result in an increase in aggressive behavior among adolescents?
• Does the implementation of a mindfulness-based intervention lead to a reduction in stress levels among working professionals?
• Is there a difference in customer satisfaction between Product A and Product B, with Product A expected to have higher satisfaction ratings?
• Does the use of social media influence self-esteem levels, with higher social media usage associated with lower self-esteem?
• Is there a negative relationship between job satisfaction and employee turnover, indicating that lower job satisfaction leads to higher turnover rates?
• Does the administration of a specific medication result in a decrease in symptoms among individuals with a particular medical condition?
• Does increased access to early childhood education lead to improved cognitive development in preschool-aged children?
• Is there a difference in purchase intention between advertisements with celebrity endorsements and advertisements without, with celebrity endorsements expected to have a higher impact?

These research questions generate specific predictions about the direction of the relationship or difference between variables and can be tested using appropriate research methods and statistical analyses.

Definition of non-directional hypothesis

Non-directional hypotheses, also known as two-tailed hypotheses, are statements in research that indicate the presence of a relationship or difference between variables without specifying the direction of the effect. Instead of making predictions about the specific direction of the relationship or difference, non-directional hypotheses simply state that there is an association or distinction between the variables of interest.

Non-directional hypotheses are often used when there is no prior theoretical basis or clear expectation about the direction of the relationship. They leave the possibility open for either a positive or negative relationship, or for both groups to differ in some way without specifying which group will perform better or worse.

Advantages and utility of non-directional hypothesis

Non-directional hypotheses in survey s offer several advantages and utilities, providing flexibility and comprehensive analysis of survey data. Here are some of the key advantages and utilities of using non-directional hypotheses in surveys:

• Exploration of Relationships : Non-directional hypotheses allow researchers to explore and examine relationships between variables without assuming a specific direction. This is particularly useful in surveys where the relationship between variables may not be well-known or there may be conflicting evidence regarding the direction of the effect.
• Flexibility in Question Design : With non-directional hypotheses, survey questions can be designed to measure the relationship between variables without being biased towards a particular outcome. This flexibility allows researchers to collect data and analyze the results more objectively.
• Open to Unexpected Findings : Non-directional hypotheses enable researchers to be open to unexpected or surprising findings in survey data. By not committing to a specific direction of the effect, researchers can identify and explore relationships that may not have been initially anticipated, leading to new insights and discoveries.
• Comprehensive Analysis : Non-directional hypotheses promote comprehensive analysis of survey data by considering the possibility of an effect in either direction. Researchers can assess the magnitude and significance of relationships without limiting their analysis to only one possible outcome.
• S tatistical Validity : Non-directional hypotheses in surveys allow for the use of two-tailed statistical tests, which provide a more conservative and robust assessment of significance. Two-tailed tests consider both positive and negative deviations from the null hypothesis, ensuring accurate and reliable statistical analysis of survey data.
• Exploratory Research : Non-directional hypotheses are particularly useful in exploratory research, where the goal is to gather initial insights and generate hypotheses. Surveys with non-directional hypotheses can help researchers explore various relationships and identify patterns that can guide further research or hypothesis development.

It is worth noting that the choice between directional and non-directional hypotheses in surveys depends on the research objectives, existing knowledge, and the specific variables being investigated. Researchers should carefully consider the advantages and limitations of each approach and select the one that aligns best with their research goals and survey design.

• Share with others
• Twitter Twitter Icon
• LinkedIn LinkedIn Icon

Related posts

How to implement nps surveys: a step-by-step guide, 15 best website survey questions to ask your visitors, how to write a good survey introduction, 7 best ai survey generators, multiple choice questions: types, examples & samples, how to make a gdpr compliant survey, get answers today.

• No credit card required
• No time limit on Free plan

You can modify this template in every possible way.

All templates work great on every device.

9 Chapter 9 Hypothesis testing

The first unit was designed to prepare you for hypothesis testing. In the first chapter we discussed the three major goals of statistics:

• Describe: connects to unit 1 with descriptive statistics and graphing
• Decide: connects to unit 1 knowing your data and hypothesis testing
• Predict: connects to hypothesis testing and unit 3

The remaining chapters will cover many different kinds of hypothesis tests connected to different inferential statistics. Needless to say, hypothesis testing is the central topic of this course. This lesson is important but that does not mean the same thing as difficult. There is a lot of new language we will learn about when conducting a hypothesis test. Some of the components of a hypothesis test are the topics we are already familiar with:

• Test statistics
• Probability
• Distribution of sample means

Hypothesis testing is an inferential procedure that uses data from a sample to draw a general conclusion about a population. It is a formal approach and a statistical method that uses sample data to evaluate hypotheses about a population. When interpreting a research question and statistical results, a natural question arises as to whether the finding could have occurred by chance. Hypothesis testing is a statistical procedure for testing whether chance (random events) is a reasonable explanation of an experimental finding. Once you have mastered the material in this lesson you will be used to solving hypothesis testing problems and the rest of the course will seem much easier. In this chapter, we will introduce the ideas behind the use of statistics to make decisions – in particular, decisions about whether a particular hypothesis is supported by the data.

Logic and Purpose of Hypothesis Testing

The statistician Ronald Fisher explained the concept of hypothesis testing with a story of a lady tasting tea. Fisher was a statistician from London and is noted as the first person to formalize the process of hypothesis testing. His elegantly simple “Lady Tasting Tea” experiment demonstrated the logic of the hypothesis test.

Figure 1. A depiction of the lady tasting tea Photo Credit

Fisher would often have afternoon tea during his studies. He usually took tea with a woman who claimed to be a tea expert. In particular, she told Fisher that she could tell which was poured first in the teacup, the milk or the tea, simply by tasting the cup. Fisher, being a scientist, decided to put this rather bizarre claim to the test. The lady accepted his challenge. Fisher brought her 8 cups of tea in succession; 4 cups would be prepared with the milk added first, and 4 with the tea added first. The cups would be presented in a random order unknown to the lady.

The lady would take a sip of each cup as it was presented and report which ingredient she believed was poured first. Using the laws of probability, Fisher determined the chances of her guessing all 8 cups correctly was 1/70, or about 1.4%. In other words, if the lady was indeed guessing there was a 1.4% chance of her getting all 8 cups correct. On the day of the experiment, Fisher had 8 cups prepared just as he had requested. The lady drank each cup and made her decisions for each one.

After the experiment, it was revealed that the lady got all 8 cups correct! Remember, had she been truly guessing, the chance of getting this result was 1.4%. Since this probability was so low , Fisher instead concluded that the lady could indeed differentiate between the milk or the tea being poured first. Fisher’s original hypothesis that she was just guessing was demonstrated to be false and was therefore rejected. The alternative hypothesis, that the lady could truly tell the cups apart, was then accepted as true.

This story demonstrates many components of hypothesis testing in a very simple way. For example, Fisher started with a hypothesis that the lady was guessing. He then determined that if she was indeed guessing, the probability of guessing all 8 right was very small, just 1.4%. Since that probability was so tiny, when she did get all 8 cups right, Fisher determined it was extremely unlikely she was guessing. A more reasonable conclusion was that the lady had the skill to tell the cups apart.

In hypothesis testing, we will always set up a particular hypothesis that we want to demonstrate to be true. We then use probability to determine the likelihood of our hypothesis is correct. If it appears our original hypothesis was wrong, we reject it and accept the alternative hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis is usually the opposite of our original hypothesis. In Fisher’s case, his original hypothesis was that the lady was guessing. His alternative hypothesis was the lady was not guessing.

This result does not prove that he does; it could be he was just lucky and guessed right 13 out of 16 times. But how plausible is the explanation that he was just lucky? To assess its plausibility, we determine the probability that someone who was just guessing would be correct 13/16 times or more. This probability can be computed to be 0.0106. This is a pretty low probability, and therefore someone would have to be very lucky to be correct 13 or more times out of 16 if they were just guessing. A low probability gives us more confidence there is evidence Bond can tell whether the drink was shaken or stirred. There is also still a chance that Mr. Bond was very lucky (more on this later!). The hypothesis that he was guessing is not proven false, but considerable doubt is cast on it. Therefore, there is strong evidence that Mr. Bond can tell whether a drink was shaken or stirred.

You may notice some patterns here:

• We have 2 hypotheses: the original (researcher prediction) and the alternative
• We collect data
• We determine how likley or unlikely the original hypothesis is to occur based on probability.
• We determine if we have enough evidence to support the original hypothesis and draw conclusions.

Now let’s being in some specific terminology:

Null hypothesis : In general, the null hypothesis, written H 0 (“H-naught”), is the idea that nothing is going on: there is no effect of our treatment, no relation between our variables, and no difference in our sample mean from what we expected about the population mean. The null hypothesis indicates that an apparent effect is due to chance. This is always our baseline starting assumption, and it is what we (typically) seek to reject . For mathematical notation, one uses =).

Alternative hypothesis : If the null hypothesis is rejected, then we will need some other explanation, which we call the alternative hypothesis, H A or H 1 . The alternative hypothesis is simply the reverse of the null hypothesis. Thus, our alternative hypothesis is the mathematical way of stating our research question.  In general, the alternative hypothesis (also called the research hypothesis)is there is an effect of treatment, the relation between variables, or differences in a sample mean compared to a population mean. The alternative hypothesis essentially shows evidence the findings are not due to chance.  It is also called the research hypothesis as this is the most common outcome a researcher is looking for: evidence of change, differences, or relationships. There are three options for setting up the alternative hypothesis, depending on where we expect the difference to lie. The alternative hypothesis always involves some kind of inequality (≠not equal, >, or <).

• If we expect a specific direction of change/differences/relationships, which we call a directional hypothesis , then our alternative hypothesis takes the form based on the research question itself.  One would expect a decrease in depression from taking an anti-depressant as a specific directional hypothesis.  Or the direction could be larger, where for example, one might expect an increase in exam scores after completing a student success exam preparation module.  The directional hypothesis (2 directions) makes up 2 of the 3 alternative hypothesis options.  The other alternative is to state there are differences/changes, or a relationship but not predict the direction.  We use a non-directional alternative hypothesis  (typically see ≠ for mathematical notation).

Probability value (p-value) : the probability of a certain outcome assuming a certain state of the world. In statistics, it is conventional to refer to possible states of the world as hypotheses since they are hypothesized states of the world. Using this terminology, the probability value is the probability of an outcome given the hypothesis. It is not the probability of the hypothesis given the outcome. It is very important to understand precisely what the probability values mean. In the James Bond example, the computed probability of 0.0106 is the probability he would be correct on 13 or more taste tests (out of 16) if he were just guessing. It is easy to mistake this probability of 0.0106 as the probability he cannot tell the difference. This is not at all what it means. The probability of 0.0106 is the probability of a certain outcome (13 or more out of 16) assuming a certain state of the world (James Bond was only guessing).

A low probability value casts doubt on the null hypothesis. How low must the probability value be in order to conclude that the null hypothesis is false? Although there is clearly no right or wrong answer to this question, it is conventional to conclude the null hypothesis is false if the probability value is less than 0.05 (p < .05). More conservative researchers conclude the null hypothesis is false only if the probability value is less than 0.01 (p<.01). When a researcher concludes that the null hypothesis is false, the researcher is said to have rejected the null hypothesis. The probability value below which the null hypothesis is rejected is called the α level or simply α (“alpha”). It is also called the significance level . If α is not explicitly specified, assume that α = 0.05.

Decision-making is part of the process and we have some language that goes along with that. Importantly, null hypothesis testing operates under the assumption that the null hypothesis is true unless the evidence shows otherwise. We (typically) seek to reject the null hypothesis, giving us evidence to support the alternative hypothesis .  If the probability of the outcome given the hypothesis is sufficiently low, we have evidence that the null hypothesis is false. Note that all probability calculations for all hypothesis tests center on the null hypothesis. In the James Bond example, the null hypothesis is that he cannot tell the difference between shaken and stirred martinis. The probability value is low that one is able to identify 13 of 16 martinis as shaken or stirred (0.0106), thus providing evidence that he can tell the difference. Note that we have not computed the probability that he can tell the difference.

The specific type of hypothesis testing reviewed is specifically known as null hypothesis statistical testing (NHST). We can break the process of null hypothesis testing down into a number of steps a researcher would use.

• Formulate a hypothesis that embodies our prediction ( before seeing the data )
• Specify null and alternative hypotheses
• Collect some data relevant to the hypothesis
• Compute a test statistic
• Identify the criteria probability (or compute the probability of the observed value of that statistic) assuming that the null hypothesis is true
• Drawing conclusions. Assess the “statistical significance” of the result

Steps in hypothesis testing

Step 1: formulate a hypothesis of interest.

The researchers hypothesized that physicians spend less time with obese patients. The researchers hypothesis derived from an identified population. In creating a research hypothesis, we also have to decide whether we want to test a directional or non-directional hypotheses. Researchers typically will select a non-directional hypothesis for a more conservative approach, particularly when the outcome is unknown (more about why this is later).

Step 2: Specify the null and alternative hypotheses

Can you set up the null and alternative hypotheses for the Physician’s Reaction Experiment?

Step 3: Determine the alpha level.

For this course, alpha will be given to you as .05 or .01.  Researchers will decide on alpha and then determine the associated test statistic based from the sample. Researchers in the Physician Reaction study might set the alpha at .05 and identify the test statistics associated with the .05 for the sample size.  Researchers might take extra precautions to be more confident in their findings (more on this later).

Step 4: Collect some data

For this course, the data will be given to you.  Researchers collect the data and then start to summarize it using descriptive statistics. The mean time physicians reported that they would spend with obese patients was 24.7 minutes as compared to a mean of 31.4 minutes for normal-weight patients.

Step 5: Compute a test statistic

We next want to use the data to compute a statistic that will ultimately let us decide whether the null hypothesis is rejected or not. We can think of the test statistic as providing a measure of the size of the effect compared to the variability in the data. In general, this test statistic will have a probability distribution associated with it, because that allows us to determine how likely our observed value of the statistic is under the null hypothesis.

To assess the plausibility of the hypothesis that the difference in mean times is due to chance, we compute the probability of getting a difference as large or larger than the observed difference (31.4 – 24.7 = 6.7 minutes) if the difference were, in fact, due solely to chance.

Step 6: Determine the probability of the observed result under the null hypothesis 

Using methods presented in later chapters, this probability associated with the observed differences between the two groups for the Physician’s Reaction was computed to be 0.0057. Since this is such a low probability, we have confidence that the difference in times is due to the patient’s weight (obese or not) (and is not due to chance). We can then reject the null hypothesis (there are no differences or differences seen are due to chance).

Keep in mind that the null hypothesis is typically the opposite of the researcher’s hypothesis. In the Physicians’ Reactions study, the researchers hypothesized that physicians would expect to spend less time with obese patients. The null hypothesis that the two types of patients are treated identically as part of the researcher’s control of other variables. If the null hypothesis were true, a difference as large or larger than the sample difference of 6.7 minutes would be very unlikely to occur. Therefore, the researchers rejected the null hypothesis of no difference and concluded that in the population, physicians intend to spend less time with obese patients.

This is the step where NHST starts to violate our intuition. Rather than determining the likelihood that the null hypothesis is true given the data, we instead determine the likelihood under the null hypothesis of observing a statistic at least as extreme as one that we have observed — because we started out by assuming that the null hypothesis is true! To do this, we need to know the expected probability distribution for the statistic under the null hypothesis, so that we can ask how likely the result would be under that distribution. This will be determined from a table we use for reference or calculated in a statistical analysis program. Note that when I say “how likely the result would be”, what I really mean is “how likely the observed result or one more extreme would be”. We need to add this caveat as we are trying to determine how weird our result would be if the null hypothesis were true, and any result that is more extreme will be even more weird, so we want to count all of those weirder possibilities when we compute the probability of our result under the null hypothesis.

Let’s review some considerations for Null hypothesis statistical testing (NHST)!

Null hypothesis statistical testing (NHST) is commonly used in many fields. If you pick up almost any scientific or biomedical research publication, you will see NHST being used to test hypotheses, and in their introductory psychology textbook, Gerrig & Zimbardo (2002) referred to NHST as the “backbone of psychological research”. Thus, learning how to use and interpret the results from hypothesis testing is essential to understand the results from many fields of research.

It is also important for you to know, however, that NHST is flawed, and that many statisticians and researchers think that it has been the cause of serious problems in science, which we will discuss in further in this unit. NHST is also widely misunderstood, largely because it violates our intuitions about how statistical hypothesis testing should work. Let’s look at an example to see this.

There is great interest in the use of body-worn cameras by police officers, which are thought to reduce the use of force and improve officer behavior. However, in order to establish this we need experimental evidence, and it has become increasingly common for governments to use randomized controlled trials to test such ideas. A randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of body-worn cameras was performed by the Washington, DC government and DC Metropolitan Police Department in 2015-2016. Officers were randomly assigned to wear a body-worn camera or not, and their behavior was then tracked over time to determine whether the cameras resulted in less use of force and fewer civilian complaints about officer behavior.

Before we get to the results, let’s ask how you would think the statistical analysis might work. Let’s say we want to specifically test the hypothesis of whether the use of force is decreased by the wearing of cameras. The randomized controlled trial provides us with the data to test the hypothesis – namely, the rates of use of force by officers assigned to either the camera or control groups. The next obvious step is to look at the data and determine whether they provide convincing evidence for or against this hypothesis. That is: What is the likelihood that body-worn cameras reduce the use of force, given the data and everything else we know?

It turns out that this is not how null hypothesis testing works. Instead, we first take our hypothesis of interest (i.e. that body-worn cameras reduce use of force), and flip it on its head, creating a null hypothesis – in this case, the null hypothesis would be that cameras do not reduce use of force. Importantly, we then assume that the null hypothesis is true. We then look at the data, and determine how likely the data would be if the null hypothesis were true. If the data are sufficiently unlikely under the null hypothesis that we can reject the null in favor of the alternative hypothesis which is our hypothesis of interest. If there is not sufficient evidence to reject the null, then we say that we retain (or “fail to reject”) the null, sticking with our initial assumption that the null is true.

Understanding some of the concepts of NHST, particularly the notorious “p-value”, is invariably challenging the first time one encounters them, because they are so counter-intuitive. As we will see later, there are other approaches that provide a much more intuitive way to address hypothesis testing (but have their own complexities).

Step 7: Assess the “statistical significance” of the result. Draw conclusions.

The next step is to determine whether the p-value that results from the previous step is small enough that we are willing to reject the null hypothesis and conclude instead that the alternative is true. In the Physicians Reactions study, the probability value is 0.0057. Therefore, the effect of obesity is statistically significant and the null hypothesis that obesity makes no difference is rejected. It is very important to keep in mind that statistical significance means only that the null hypothesis of exactly no effect is rejected; it does not mean that the effect is important, which is what “significant” usually means. When an effect is significant, you can have confidence the effect is not exactly zero. Finding that an effect is significant does not tell you about how large or important the effect is.

How much evidence do we require and what considerations are needed to better understand the significance of the findings? This is one of the most controversial questions in statistics, in part because it requires a subjective judgment – there is no “correct” answer.

What does a statistically significant result mean?

There is a great deal of confusion about what p-values actually mean (Gigerenzer, 2004). Let’s say that we do an experiment comparing the means between conditions, and we find a difference with a p-value of .01. There are a number of possible interpretations that one might entertain.

Does it mean that the probability of the null hypothesis being true is .01? No. Remember that in null hypothesis testing, the p-value is the probability of the data given the null hypothesis. It does not warrant conclusions about the probability of the null hypothesis given the data.

Does it mean that the probability that you are making the wrong decision is .01? No. Remember as above that p-values are probabilities of data under the null, not probabilities of hypotheses.

Does it mean that if you ran the study again, you would obtain the same result 99% of the time? No. The p-value is a statement about the likelihood of a particular dataset under the null; it does not allow us to make inferences about the likelihood of future events such as replication.

Does it mean that you have found a practially important effect? No. There is an essential distinction between statistical significance and practical significance . As an example, let’s say that we performed a randomized controlled trial to examine the effect of a particular diet on body weight, and we find a statistically significant effect at p<.05. What this doesn’t tell us is how much weight was actually lost, which we refer to as the effect size (to be discussed in more detail). If we think about a study of weight loss, then we probably don’t think that the loss of one ounce (i.e. the weight of a few potato chips) is practically significant. Let’s look at our ability to detect a significant difference of 1 ounce as the sample size increases.

A statistically significant result is not necessarily a strong one. Even a very weak result can be statistically significant if it is based on a large enough sample. This is why it is important to distinguish between the statistical significance of a result and the practical significance of that result. Practical significance refers to the importance or usefulness of the result in some real-world context and is often referred to as the effect size .

Many differences are statistically significant—and may even be interesting for purely scientific reasons—but they are not practically significant. In clinical practice, this same concept is often referred to as “clinical significance.” For example, a study on a new treatment for social phobia might show that it produces a statistically significant positive effect. Yet this effect still might not be strong enough to justify the time, effort, and other costs of putting it into practice—especially if easier and cheaper treatments that work almost as well already exist. Although statistically significant, this result would be said to lack practical or clinical significance.

Be aware that the term effect size can be misleading because it suggests a causal relationship—that the difference between the two means is an “effect” of being in one group or condition as opposed to another. In other words, simply calling the difference an “effect size” does not make the relationship a causal one.

Figure 1 shows how the proportion of significant results increases as the sample size increases, such that with a very large sample size (about 262,000 total subjects), we will find a significant result in more than 90% of studies when there is a 1 ounce difference in weight loss between the diets. While these are statistically significant, most physicians would not consider a weight loss of one ounce to be practically or clinically significant. We will explore this relationship in more detail when we return to the concept of statistical power in Chapter X, but it should already be clear from this example that statistical significance is not necessarily indicative of practical significance.

Figure 1: The proportion of significant results for a very small change (1 ounce, which is about .001 standard deviations) as a function of sample size.

Challenges with using p-values

Historically, the most common answer to this question has been that we should reject the null hypothesis if the p-value is less than 0.05. This comes from the writings of Ronald Fisher, who has been referred to as “the single most important figure in 20th century statistics” (Efron, 1998 ) :

“If P is between .1 and .9 there is certainly no reason to suspect the hypothesis tested. If it is below .02 it is strongly indicated that the hypothesis fails to account for the whole of the facts. We shall not often be astray if we draw a conventional line at .05 … it is convenient to draw the line at about the level at which we can say: Either there is something in the treatment, or a coincidence has occurred such as does not occur more than once in twenty trials” (Fisher, 1925 )

Fisher never intended p<0.05p < 0.05 to be a fixed rule:

“no scientific worker has a fixed level of significance at which from year to year, and in all circumstances, he rejects hypotheses; he rather gives his mind to each particular case in the light of his evidence and his ideas” (Fisher, 1956 )

Instead, it is likely that p < .05 became a ritual due to the reliance upon tables of p-values that were used before computing made it easy to compute p values for arbitrary values of a statistic. All of the tables had an entry for 0.05, making it easy to determine whether one’s statistic exceeded the value needed to reach that level of significance. Although we use tables in this class, statistical software examines the specific probability value for the calculated statistic.

Assessing Error Rate: Type I and Type II Error

Although there are challenges with p-values for decision making, we will examine a way we can think about hypothesis testing in terms of its error rate.  This was proposed by Jerzy Neyman and Egon Pearson:

“no test based upon a theory of probability can by itself provide any valuable evidence of the truth or falsehood of a hypothesis. But we may look at the purpose of tests from another viewpoint. Without hoping to know whether each separate hypothesis is true or false, we may search for rules to govern our behaviour with regard to them, in following which we insure that, in the long run of experience, we shall not often be wrong” (Neyman & Pearson, 1933 )

That is: We can’t know which specific decisions are right or wrong, but if we follow the rules, we can at least know how often our decisions will be wrong in the long run.

To understand the decision-making framework that Neyman and Pearson developed, we first need to discuss statistical decision-making in terms of the kinds of outcomes that can occur. There are two possible states of reality (H0 is true, or H0 is false), and two possible decisions (reject H0, or retain H0). There are two ways in which we can make a correct decision:

• We can reject H0 when it is false (in the language of signal detection theory, we call this a hit )
• We can retain H0 when it is true (somewhat confusingly in this context, this is called a correct rejection )

There are also two kinds of errors we can make:

• We can reject H0 when it is actually true (we call this a false alarm , or Type I error ), Type I error  means that we have concluded that there is a relationship in the population when in fact there is not. Type I errors occur because even when there is no relationship in the population, sampling error alone will occasionally produce an extreme result.
• We can retain H0 when it is actually false (we call this a miss , or Type II error ). Type II error  means that we have concluded that there is no relationship in the population when in fact there is.

Summing up, when you perform a hypothesis test, there are four possible outcomes depending on the actual truth (or falseness) of the null hypothesis H0 and the decision to reject or not. The outcomes are summarized in the following table:

Table 1. The four possible outcomes in hypothesis testing.

• The decision is not to reject H0 when H0 is true (correct decision).
• The decision is to reject H0 when H0 is true (incorrect decision known as a Type I error ).
• The decision is not to reject H0 when, in fact, H0 is false (incorrect decision known as a Type II error ).
• The decision is to reject H0 when H0 is false ( correct decision ).

Neyman and Pearson coined two terms to describe the probability of these two types of errors in the long run:

• P(Type I error) = αalpha
• P(Type II error) = βbeta

That is, if we set αalpha to .05, then in the long run we should make a Type I error 5% of the time. The 𝞪 (alpha) , is associated with the p-value for the level of significance. Again it’s common to set αalpha as .05. In fact, when the null hypothesis is true and α is .05, we will mistakenly reject the null hypothesis 5% of the time. (This is why α is sometimes referred to as the “Type I error rate.”) In principle, it is possible to reduce the chance of a Type I error by setting α to something less than .05. Setting it to .01, for example, would mean that if the null hypothesis is true, then there is only a 1% chance of mistakenly rejecting it. But making it harder to reject true null hypotheses also makes it harder to reject false ones and therefore increases the chance of a Type II error.

In practice, Type II errors occur primarily because the research design lacks adequate statistical power to detect the relationship (e.g., the sample is too small).  Statistical power is the complement of Type II error. We will have more to say about statistical power shortly. The standard value for an acceptable level of β (beta) is .2 – that is, we are willing to accept that 20% of the time we will fail to detect a true effect when it truly exists. It is possible to reduce the chance of a Type II error by setting α to something greater than .05 (e.g., .10). But making it easier to reject false null hypotheses also makes it easier to reject true ones and therefore increases the chance of a Type I error. This provides some insight into why the convention is to set α to .05. There is some agreement among researchers that level of α keeps the rates of both Type I and Type II errors at acceptable levels.

The possibility of committing Type I and Type II errors has several important implications for interpreting the results of our own and others’ research. One is that we should be cautious about interpreting the results of any individual study because there is a chance that it reflects a Type I or Type II error. This is why researchers consider it important to replicate their studies. Each time researchers replicate a study and find a similar result, they rightly become more confident that the result represents a real phenomenon and not just a Type I or Type II error.

Test Statistic Assumptions

Last consideration we will revisit with each test statistic (e.g., t-test, z-test and ANOVA) in the coming chapters.  There are four main assumptions. These assumptions are often taken for granted in using prescribed data for the course.  In the real world, these assumptions would need to be examined, often tested using statistical software.

• Assumption of random sampling. A sample is random when each person (or animal) point in your population has an equal chance of being included in the sample; therefore selection of any individual happens by chance, rather than by choice. This reduces the chance that differences in materials, characteristics or conditions may bias results. Remember that random samples are more likely to be representative of the population so researchers can be more confident interpreting the results. Note: there is no test that statistical software can perform which assures random sampling has occurred but following good sampling techniques helps to ensure your samples are random.
• Assumption of Independence. Statistical independence is a critical assumption for many statistical tests including the 2-sample t-test and ANOVA. It is assumed that observations are independent of each other often but often this assumption. Is not met. Independence means the value of one observation does not influence or affect the value of other observations. Independent data items are not connected with one another in any way (unless you account for it in your study). Even the smallest dependence in your data can turn into heavily biased results (which may be undetectable) if you violate this assumption. Note: there is no test statistical software can perform that assures independence of the data because this should be addressed during the research planning phase. Using a non-parametric test is often recommended if a researcher is concerned this assumption has been violated.
• Assumption of Normality. Normality assumes that the continuous variables (dependent variable) used in the analysis are normally distributed. Normal distributions are symmetric around the center (the mean) and form a bell-shaped distribution. Normality is violated when sample data are skewed. With large enough sample sizes (n > 30) the violation of the normality assumption should not cause major problems (remember the central limit theorem) but there is a feature in most statistical software that can alert researchers to an assumption violation.
• Assumption of Equal Variance. Variance refers to the spread or of scores from the mean. Many statistical tests assume that although different samples can come from populations with different means, they have the same variance. Equality of variance (i.e., homogeneity of variance) is violated when variances across different groups or samples are significantly different. Note: there is a feature in most statistical software to test for this.

We will use 4 main steps for hypothesis testing:

• Usually the hypotheses concern population parameters and predict the characteristics that a sample should have
• Null: Null hypothesis (H0) states that there is no difference, no effect or no change between population means and sample means. There is no difference.
• Alternative: Alternative hypothesis (H1 or HA) states that there is a difference or a change between the population and sample. It is the opposite of the null hypothesis.
• Set criteria for a decision. In this step we must determine the boundary of our distribution at which the null hypothesis will be rejected. Researchers usually use either a 5% (.05) cutoff or 1% (.01) critical boundary. Recall from our earlier story about Ronald Fisher that the lower the probability the more confident the was that the Tea Lady was not guessing.  We will apply this to z in the next chapter.
• Compare sample and population to decide if the hypothesis has support
• When a researcher uses hypothesis testing, the individual is making a decision about whether the data collected is sufficient to state that the population parameters are significantly different.

Further considerations

The probability value is the probability of a result as extreme or more extreme given that the null hypothesis is true. It is the probability of the data given the null hypothesis. It is not the probability that the null hypothesis is false.

A low probability value indicates that the sample outcome (or one more extreme) would be very unlikely if the null hypothesis were true. We will learn more about assessing effect size later in this unit.

3.  A non-significant outcome means that the data do not conclusively demonstrate that the null hypothesis is false. There is always a chance of error and 4 outcomes associated with hypothesis testing.

• It is important to take into account the assumptions for each test statistic.

Learning objectives

Having read the chapter, you should be able to:

• Identify the components of a hypothesis test, including the parameter of interest, the null and alternative hypotheses, and the test statistic.
• State the hypotheses and identify appropriate critical areas depending on how hypotheses are set up.
• Describe the proper interpretations of a p-value as well as common misinterpretations.
• Distinguish between the two types of error in hypothesis testing, and the factors that determine them.
• Describe the main criticisms of null hypothesis statistical testing
• Identify the purpose of effect size and power.

Exercises – Ch. 9

• In your own words, explain what the null hypothesis is.
• What are Type I and Type II Errors?
• Why do we phrase null and alternative hypotheses with population parameters and not sample means?
• If our null hypothesis is “H0: μ = 40”, what are the three possible alternative hypotheses?
• Why do we state our hypotheses and decision criteria before we collect our data?
• When and why do you calculate an effect size?

Answers to Odd- Numbered Exercises – Ch. 9

1. Your answer should include mention of the baseline assumption of no difference between the sample and the population.

3. Alpha is the significance level. It is the criteria we use when decided to reject or fail to reject the null hypothesis, corresponding to a given proportion of the area under the normal distribution and a probability of finding extreme scores assuming the null hypothesis is true.

5. μ > 40; μ < 40; μ ≠ 40

7. We calculate effect size to determine the strength of the finding.  Effect size should always be calculated when the we have rejected the null hypothesis.  Effect size can be calculated for non-significant findings as a possible indicator of Type II error.

Introduction to Statistics for Psychology Copyright © 2021 by Alisa Beyer is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

7.3: The Research Hypothesis and the Null Hypothesis

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 18038

• Michelle Oja
• Taft College

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Hypotheses are predictions of expected findings.

The Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

Directional Research Hypothesis

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

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

Example \(\PageIndex{1}\)

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

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

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

Non-Directional Research Hypothesis

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

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

Exercise \(\PageIndex{1}\)

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

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

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

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

The Null Hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Exercise \(\PageIndex{2}\)

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

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

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

Contributors and Attributions

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

Dr. MO ( Taft College )

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

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

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

Edward barroga.

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

Glafera Janet Matanguihan

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

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

INTRODUCTION

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

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

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

DEFINITIONS AND RELATIONSHIP OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

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

CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

TYPES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

Research questions in quantitative research

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

Hypotheses in quantitative research

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

Research questions in qualitative research

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

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

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

Hypotheses in qualitative research

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

FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONSTRUCTING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

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

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

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

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

EXAMPLES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS FROM PUBLISHED ARTICLES

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

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESES IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES

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

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

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

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

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

Author Contributions:

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

Non Directional Hypothesis

In the realm of hypothesis formulation, non-directional hypotheses offer a distinct perspective. These hypotheses suggest a relationship between variables without specifying the nature or direction of that relationship. This guide delves into non-directional hypothesis examples across various fields, outlines a step-by-step approach to crafting them, and provides expert tips to ensure your non-directional hypotheses are robust and insightful. Explore the world of Thesis statement hypotheses that explore connections without predetermined expectations.

What is the Non-Directional Hypothesis? – Definition

A non-directional hypothesis, also known as a two tailed hypothesis , is a type of hypothesis that predicts a relationship between variables without specifying the direction of that relationship. Unlike directional hypotheses that predict a specific outcome, non-directional hypotheses simply suggest that a relationship exists without indicating whether one variable will increase or decrease in response to changes in the other variable.

What is an Example of a Non-Directional Hypothesis Statement?

Size: 219 KB

“An increase in exercise frequency is associated with changes in weight.”

In this non-directional hypothesis, the statement suggests that a relationship exists between exercise frequency and weight changes but doesn’t specify whether increased exercise will lead to weight loss or weight gain. It leaves the direction of the relationship open for empirical investigation and data analysis.

100 Non Directional Hypothesis Statement Examples

Non-directional hypotheses explore relationships between variables without predicting the specific outcome. These simple hypothesis offer flexibility, allowing researchers to uncover unforeseen connections. Discover a range of non-directional hypothesis examples that span disciplines, enabling empirical exploration and evidence-based conclusions.

• Impact of Stress on Sleep Quality : Stress levels are related to changes in sleep quality among college students.
• Relationship Between Social Media Use and Loneliness : Social media use is associated with variations in reported feelings of loneliness.
• Connection Between Parenting Styles and Adolescent Self-Esteem : Different parenting styles correlate with differences in adolescent self-esteem levels.
• Effects of Temperature on Productivity : Temperature variations affect productivity levels in office environments.
• Link Between Screen Time and Eye Strain : Screen time is related to variations in reported eye strain among digital device users.
• Influence of Study Techniques on Exam Performance : Study techniques correlate with differences in exam performance among students.
• Relationship Between Classroom Environment and Student Engagement : Classroom environment is associated with variations in student engagement levels.
• Impact of Music Tempo on Heart Rate : Music tempo relates to changes in heart rate during exercise.
• Connection Between Diet and Cholesterol Levels : Dietary choices are related to variations in cholesterol levels among adults.
• Effects of Outdoor Exposure on Mood : Outdoor exposure is associated with changes in reported mood among urban dwellers.
• Relationship Between Personality Traits and Leadership Styles : Personality traits are associated with differences in preferred leadership styles among professionals.
• Impact of Time Management Strategies on Academic Performance : Time management strategies correlate with variations in academic performance among college students.
• Connection Between Cultural Exposure and Empathy Levels : Cultural exposure relates to changes in reported empathy levels among individuals.
• Effects of Nutrition Education on Dietary Choices : Nutrition education is associated with variations in dietary choices among adolescents.
• Link Between Social Support and Stress Levels : Social support is related to differences in reported stress levels among working adults.
• Influence of Exercise Intensity on Mood : Exercise intensity correlates with variations in reported mood among fitness enthusiasts.
• Relationship Between Parental Involvement and Academic Achievement : Parental involvement is associated with differences in academic achievement among schoolchildren.
• Impact of Sleep Duration on Cognitive Function : Sleep duration is related to changes in cognitive function among older adults.
• Connection Between Environmental Factors and Creativity : Environmental factors correlate with variations in reported creative thinking abilities among artists.
• Effects of Communication Styles on Conflict Resolution : Communication styles are associated with differences in conflict resolution outcomes among couples.
• Relationship Between Social Interaction and Life Satisfaction : Social interaction is related to variations in reported life satisfaction among elderly individuals.
• Impact of Classroom Seating Arrangements on Participation : Classroom seating arrangements correlate with differences in student participation levels.
• Connection Between Smartphone Use and Sleep Quality : Smartphone use is associated with changes in reported sleep quality among young adults.
• Effects of Mindfulness Practices on Stress Reduction : Mindfulness practices relate to variations in reported stress levels among participants.
• Link Between Gender and Communication Styles : Gender is related to differences in communication styles among individuals in group discussions.
• Influence of Advertising Exposure on Purchase Decisions : Advertising exposure correlates with variations in reported purchase decisions among consumers.
• Relationship Between Job Satisfaction and Employee Productivity : Job satisfaction is associated with differences in employee productivity levels.
• Impact of Social Support on Coping Mechanisms : Social support relates to variations in reported coping mechanisms among individuals facing challenges.
• Connection Between Classroom Environment and Student Creativity : Classroom environment is related to changes in student creativity levels.
• Effects of Exercise on Mood : Exercise is associated with variations in reported mood levels among participants.
• Relationship Between Music Preferences and Stress Levels : Music preferences are related to variations in reported stress levels among individuals.
• Impact of Nutrition Education on Food Choices : Nutrition education correlates with differences in dietary food choices among adolescents.
• Connection Between Physical Activity and Cognitive Function : Physical activity is associated with changes in cognitive function among older adults.
• Effects of Color Exposure on Mood : Color exposure relates to variations in reported mood levels among participants.
• Link Between Personality Traits and Career Choice : Personality traits are related to differences in career choices among individuals.
• Influence of Outdoor Recreation on Mental Well-being : Outdoor recreation is associated with variations in reported mental well-being among participants.
• Relationship Between Social Media Use and Self-Esteem : Social media use correlates with changes in reported self-esteem levels among young adults.
• Impact of Parenting Styles on Adolescent Risk Behavior : Parenting styles are related to variations in reported risk behaviors among adolescents.
• Connection Between Sleep Quality and Cognitive Performance : Sleep quality relates to changes in cognitive performance among students.
• Effects of Art Exposure on Creativity : Art exposure is associated with differences in reported creative thinking abilities among participants.
• Relationship Between Social Support and Mental Health : Social support is related to variations in reported mental health outcomes among individuals.
• Impact of Technology Use on Interpersonal Communication : Technology use correlates with differences in reported interpersonal communication skills among individuals.
• Connection Between Parental Attachment and Romantic Relationships : Parental attachment is associated with variations in the quality of romantic relationships among adults.
• Effects of Environmental Noise on Concentration : Environmental noise relates to changes in reported concentration levels among students.
• Link Between Music Exposure and Memory Performance : Music exposure is related to differences in memory performance among participants.
• Influence of Nutrition on Physical Fitness : Nutrition choices correlate with variations in reported physical fitness levels among athletes.
• Relationship Between Stress and Health Outcomes : Stress levels are associated with changes in reported health outcomes among individuals.
• Impact of Workplace Environment on Job Satisfaction : Workplace environment relates to differences in reported job satisfaction among employees.
• Connection Between Humor and Stress Reduction : Humor is related to variations in reported stress reduction among participants.
• Effects of Social Interaction on Emotional Well-being : Social interaction correlates with changes in reported emotional well-being among participants.
• Relationship Between Cultural Exposure and Cognitive Flexibility : Cultural exposure is related to variations in reported cognitive flexibility among individuals.
• Impact of Parent-Child Communication on Academic Achievement : Parent-child communication correlates with differences in academic achievement levels among students.
• Connection Between Personality Traits and Prosocial Behavior : Personality traits are associated with variations in reported prosocial behaviors among individuals.
• Effects of Nature Exposure on Stress Reduction : Nature exposure relates to changes in reported stress reduction among participants.
• Link Between Sleep Duration and Cognitive Performance : Sleep duration is related to differences in cognitive performance among participants.
• Influence of Social Media Use on Body Image : Social media use correlates with variations in reported body image satisfaction among young adults.
• Relationship Between Exercise and Mental Well-being : Exercise levels are associated with changes in reported mental well-being among participants.
• Impact of Cultural Competency Training on Patient Care : Cultural competency training relates to differences in patient care outcomes among healthcare professionals.
• Connection Between Perceived Social Support and Resilience : Perceived social support is related to variations in reported resilience levels among individuals.
• Effects of Environmental Factors on Mood : Environmental factors correlate with changes in reported mood levels among participants.
• Relationship Between Cultural Diversity and Team Performance : Cultural diversity is related to variations in reported team performance outcomes among professionals.
• Impact of Parental Involvement on Academic Motivation : Parental involvement correlates with differences in academic motivation levels among schoolchildren.
• Connection Between Mindfulness Practices and Anxiety Reduction : Mindfulness practices are associated with changes in reported anxiety levels among participants.
• Effects of Nutrition Education on Eating Habits : Nutrition education relates to variations in dietary eating habits among adolescents.
• Link Between Personality Traits and Learning Styles : Personality traits are related to differences in preferred learning styles among students.
• Influence of Nature Exposure on Creativity : Nature exposure correlates with variations in reported creative thinking abilities among individuals.
• Relationship Between Extracurricular Activities and Social Skills : Extracurricular activities are associated with changes in reported social skills among adolescents.
• Impact of Cultural Awareness Training on Stereotypes : Cultural awareness training relates to differences in perceived stereotypes among participants.
• Connection Between Sleep Quality and Emotional Regulation : Sleep quality is related to variations in reported emotional regulation skills among individuals.
• Effects of Music Exposure on Mood : Music exposure correlates with changes in reported mood levels among participants.
• Relationship Between Cultural Sensitivity and Cross-Cultural Communication : Cultural sensitivity is related to variations in reported cross-cultural communication skills among professionals.
• Impact of Parent-Child Bonding on Emotional Well-being : Parent-child bonding correlates with differences in reported emotional well-being levels among individuals.
• Connection Between Personality Traits and Conflict Resolution Styles : Personality traits are associated with variations in preferred conflict resolution styles among individuals.
• Effects of Mindfulness Practices on Focus and Concentration : Mindfulness practices relate to changes in reported focus and concentration levels among participants.
• Link Between Gender Identity and Career Aspirations : Gender identity is related to differences in reported career aspirations among individuals.
• Influence of Art Exposure on Emotional Expression : Art exposure correlates with variations in reported emotional expression abilities among participants.
• Relationship Between Peer Influence and Risky Behavior : Peer influence is associated with changes in reported engagement in risky behaviors among adolescents.
• Impact of Diversity Training on Workplace Harmony : Diversity training relates to differences in perceived workplace harmony among employees.
• Connection Between Sleep Patterns and Cognitive Performance : Sleep patterns are related to variations in cognitive performance among students.
• Effects of Exercise on Self-Esteem : Exercise correlates with changes in reported self-esteem levels among participants.
• Relationship Between Social Interaction and Well-being : Social interaction is related to variations in reported well-being levels among individuals.
• Impact of Parenting Styles on Adolescent Peer Relationships : Parenting styles correlate with differences in peer relationship quality among adolescents.
• Connection Between Personality Traits and Communication Effectiveness : Personality traits are associated with variations in communication effectiveness among professionals.
• Effects of Outdoor Activities on Stress Reduction : Outdoor activities relate to changes in reported stress reduction among participants.
• Link Between Music Exposure and Emotional Regulation : Music exposure is related to differences in reported emotional regulation skills among individuals.
• Influence of Family Dynamics on Academic Achievement : Family dynamics correlate with variations in academic achievement levels among students.
• Relationship Between Cultural Engagement and Empathy : Cultural engagement is associated with changes in reported empathy levels among individuals.
• Impact of Conflict Resolution Strategies on Relationship Satisfaction : Conflict resolution strategies relate to differences in reported relationship satisfaction levels among couples.
• Connection Between Sleep Quality and Physical Health : Sleep quality is related to variations in reported physical health outcomes among individuals.
• Effects of Social Support on Coping with Stress : Social support correlates with changes in reported coping strategies for stress among participants.
• Relationship Between Cultural Sensitivity and Patient Care : Cultural sensitivity is related to variations in reported patient care outcomes among healthcare professionals.
• Impact of Family Communication on Adolescent Well-being : Family communication correlates with differences in reported well-being levels among adolescents.
• Connection Between Personality Traits and Leadership Styles : Personality traits are associated with variations in preferred leadership styles among professionals.
• Effects of Nature Exposure on Attention Span : Nature exposure relates to changes in reported attention span among participants.
• Link Between Music Preference and Emotional Expression : Music preference is related to differences in reported emotional expression abilities among individuals.
• Influence of Peer Support on Academic Success : Peer support correlates with variations in reported academic success levels among students.
• Relationship Between Cultural Engagement and Creativity : Cultural engagement is associated with changes in reported creative thinking abilities among individuals.
• Impact of Conflict Resolution Skills on Relationship Satisfaction : Conflict resolution skills relate to differences in reported relationship satisfaction levels among couples.
• Connection Between Sleep Patterns and Stress Levels : Sleep patterns are related to variations in reported stress levels among individuals.
• Effects of Social Interaction on Happiness : Social interaction correlates with changes in reported happiness levels among participants.

Non-Directional Hypothesis Statement Examples for Psychology

These examples pertain to psychological studies and cover various relationships between psychological hypothesis concepts. For instance, the first example suggests that attachment styles might be related to romantic satisfaction, but it doesn’t specify whether attachment styles would increase or decrease satisfaction.

• Relationship Between Attachment Styles and Romantic Satisfaction : Attachment styles are related to variations in reported romantic satisfaction levels among individuals in psychology studies.
• Impact of Personality Traits on Career Success : Personality traits correlate with differences in reported career success outcomes among psychology study participants.
• Connection Between Parenting Styles and Adolescent Self-Esteem : Parenting styles are associated with variations in reported self-esteem levels among adolescents in psychological research.
• Effects of Social Media Use on Body Image : Social media use relates to changes in reported body image satisfaction among young adults in psychology experiments.
• Link Between Sleep Patterns and Emotional Well-being : Sleep patterns are related to differences in reported emotional well-being levels among psychology research participants.
• Influence of Mindfulness Practices on Stress Reduction : Mindfulness practices correlate with variations in reported stress reduction among psychology study participants.
• Relationship Between Social Interaction and Mental Health : Social interaction is associated with changes in reported mental health outcomes among individuals in psychology studies.
• Impact of Parent-Child Bonding on Emotional Resilience : Parent-child bonding relates to differences in reported emotional resilience levels among psychology research participants.
• Connection Between Cultural Sensitivity and Empathy : Cultural sensitivity is related to variations in reported empathy levels among individuals in psychology experiments.
• Effects of Exercise on Mood : Exercise correlates with changes in reported mood levels among psychology study participants.

Non-Directional Hypothesis Statement Examples in Research

These research hypothesis examples focus on research studies in general, covering a wide range of topics and relationships. For instance, the second example suggests that employee training might be related to workplace productivity, without indicating whether the training would lead to higher or lower productivity.

• Relationship Between Time Management and Academic Performance : Time management is related to variations in academic performance levels among research participants.
• Impact of Employee Training on Workplace Productivity : Employee training correlates with differences in reported workplace productivity outcomes among research subjects.
• Connection Between Media Exposure and Political Knowledge : Media exposure is associated with variations in reported political knowledge levels among research participants.
• Effects of Environmental Factors on Children’s Cognitive Development : Environmental factors relate to changes in reported cognitive development among research subjects.
• Link Between Parental Involvement and Student Motivation : Parental involvement is related to differences in reported student motivation levels among research participants.
• Influence of Cultural Immersion on Language Proficiency : Cultural immersion correlates with variations in reported language proficiency levels among research subjects.
• Relationship Between Leadership Styles and Team Performance : Leadership styles are associated with changes in reported team performance outcomes among research participants.
• Impact of Financial Literacy Education on Savings Habits : Financial literacy education relates to differences in reported savings habits among research subjects.
• Connection Between Stress Levels and Physical Health : Stress levels are related to variations in reported physical health outcomes among research participants.
• Effects of Music Exposure on Concentration : Music exposure correlates with changes in reported concentration levels among research subjects.

Non-Directional Hypothesis Statement Examples for Research Methodology

These examples are specific to the methods used in conducting research. The eighth example states that randomization might relate to group equivalence, but it doesn’t specify whether randomization would lead to more equivalent or less equivalent groups.

• Relationship Between Sampling Techniques and Research Validity : Sampling techniques are related to variations in research validity outcomes in studies of research methodology.
• Impact of Data Collection Methods on Data Accuracy : Data collection methods correlate with differences in reported data accuracy in research methodology experiments.
• Connection Between Research Design and Study Reproducibility : Research design is associated with variations in reported study reproducibility in research methodology studies.
• Effects of Questionnaire Format on Response Consistency : Questionnaire format relates to changes in reported response consistency in research methodology research.
• Link Between Ethical Considerations and Research Credibility : Ethical considerations are related to differences in reported research credibility in studies of research methodology.
• Influence of Measurement Scales on Data Precision : Measurement scales correlate with variations in reported data precision in research methodology experiments.
• Relationship Between Experimental Controls and Internal Validity : Experimental controls are associated with changes in internal validity outcomes in research methodology studies.
• Impact of Randomization on Group Equivalence : Randomization relates to differences in reported group equivalence in research methodology research.
• Connection Between Qualitative Data Analysis Methods and Data Richness : Qualitative data analysis methods are related to variations in reported data richness in studies of research methodology.
• Effects of Hypothesis Formulation on Research Focus : Hypothesis formulation correlates with changes in reported research focus in research methodology experiments.

These non-directional hypothesis statement examples offer insights into the diverse array of relationships explored in psychology, research, and research methodology studies, fostering empirical discovery and contributing to the advancement of knowledge across various fields.

Difference between Directional & Non-Directional Hypothesis

Directional and non-directional hypotheses are distinct approaches used in formulating hypotheses for research studies. Understanding the differences between them is essential for researchers to choose the appropriate type of causal hypothesis based on their study’s goals and prior knowledge.

• Direction: Directional hypotheses predict a specific relationship direction, while non-directional hypotheses do not specify a direction.
• Specificity: Directional hypotheses are more specific, while non-directional hypotheses are more general.
• Flexibility: Non-directional hypotheses allow for open-ended exploration, while directional hypotheses focus on confirming or refuting specific expectations.

How to Write a Non-Directional Hypothesis Statement – Step by Step Guide

• Identify Variables: Clearly define the variables you’re investigating—usually, an independent variable (the one manipulated) and a dependent variable (the one measured).
• Indicate Relationship: State that a relationship exists between the variables without predicting a specific direction.
• Use General Language: Craft the statement in a way that encompasses various possible outcomes.
• Avoid Biased Language: Do not include words that suggest a stronger effect or specific outcome for either variable.
• Connect to Research: If applicable, link the hypothesis to existing research or theories that justify exploring the relationship.

Tips for Writing a Non-Directional Hypothesis

• Start with Inquiry: Frame your hypothesis as an answer to a research question.
• Embrace Openness: Non-directional hypotheses are ideal when no strong expectation exists.
• Be Succinct: Keep the hypothesis statement concise and clear.
• Stay Neutral: Avoid implying that one variable will have a stronger impact.
• Allow Exploration: Leave room for various potential outcomes without preconceived notions.
• Tailor to Context: Ensure the hypothesis aligns with your research context and goals.

Non-directional hypotheses are particularly useful in exploratory research, where researchers aim to discover relationships without imposing specific expectations. They allow for unbiased investigation and the potential to uncover unexpected patterns or connections.

Remember that whether you choose a directional or non-directional hypothesis, both play critical roles in shaping the research process, guiding study design, data collection, and analysis. The choice depends on the research’s nature, goals, and existing knowledge in the field.  You may also be interested in our  science hypothesis .

AI Generator

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

Directional vs Non-Directional Hypothesis: Difference Between Them

In statistics, a directional hypothesis, also known as a one-tailed hypothesis, is a type of hypothesis that predicts the direction of the relationship between variables or the direction of the difference between groups.

The introduction of a directional hypothesis in a research study provides an overview of the specific prediction being made about the relationship between variables or the difference between groups. It sets the stage for the research question and outlines the expected direction of the findings. The introduction typically includes the following elements:

Research Context: Begin by introducing the general topic or research area that the study is focused on. Provide background information and highlight the significance of the research question.

Research Question: Clearly state the specific research question that the study aims to answer. This question should be directly related to the variables being investigated.

Previous Research: Summarize relevant literature or previous studies that have explored similar or related topics. This helps establish the existing knowledge base and provides a rationale for the hypothesis.

Hypothesis Statement: Present the directional hypothesis clearly and concisely. State the predicted relationship between variables or the expected difference between groups. For example, if studying the impact of a new teaching method on student performance, a directional hypothesis could be, “Students who receive the new teaching method will demonstrate higher test scores compared to students who receive the traditional teaching method.”

Justification: Provide a logical explanation for the directional hypothesis based on the existing literature or theoretical framework. Discuss any previous findings, theories, or empirical evidence that support the predicted direction of the relationship or difference.

Objectives: Outline the specific objectives or aims of the study, which should align with the research question and hypothesis. These objectives help guide the research process and provide a clear focus for the study.

By including these elements in the introduction of a research study, the directional hypothesis is introduced effectively, providing a clear and justified prediction about the expected outcome of the research.

When formulating a directional hypothesis, researchers make a specific prediction about the expected relationship or difference between variables. They specify whether they expect an increase or decrease in the dependent variable, or whether one group will score higher or lower than another group

What is Directional Hypothesis?

With a correlational study, a directional hypothesis states that there is a positive (or negative) correlation between two variables. When a hypothesis states the direction of the results, it is referred to as a directional (one-tailed) hypothesis; this is because it states that the results go in one direction.

Definition :

A directional hypothesis is a one-tailed hypothesis that states the direction of the difference or relationship (e.g. boys are more helpful than girls).

Research Question: Does exercise have a positive impact on mood?

Directional Hypothesis: Engaging in regular exercise will result in an increase in positive mood compared to a sedentary lifestyle.

In this example, the directional hypothesis predicts that regular exercise will have a specific effect on mood, specifically leading to an increase in positive mood. The researcher expects that individuals who engage in regular exercise will experience improvements in their overall mood compared to individuals who lead a sedentary lifestyle.

It’s important to note that this is just one example, and directional hypotheses can be formulated in various research areas and contexts. The key is to make a specific prediction about the direction of the relationship or difference between variables based on prior knowledge or theoretical considerations.

Advantages of Directional Hypothesis

There are several advantages to using a directional hypothesis in research studies. Here are a few key benefits:

Specific Prediction:

A directional hypothesis allows researchers to make a specific prediction about the expected relationship or difference between variables. This provides a clear focus for the study and helps guide the research process. It also allows for more precise interpretation of the results.

Testable and Refutable:

Directional hypotheses can be tested and either supported or refuted by empirical evidence. Researchers can design their study and select appropriate statistical tests to specifically examine the predicted direction of the relationship or difference. This enhances the rigor and validity of the research.

Efficiency and Resource Allocation:

By making a specific prediction, researchers can allocate their resources more efficiently. They can focus on collecting data and conducting analyses that directly test the directional hypothesis, rather than exploring all possible directions or relationships. This can save time, effort, and resources.

Theory Development:

Directional hypotheses contribute to the development of theories and scientific knowledge. When a directional hypothesis is supported by empirical evidence, it provides support for existing theories or helps generate new theories. This advancement in knowledge can guide future research and understanding in the field.

Practical Applications:

Directional hypotheses can have practical implications and applications. If a hypothesis predicts a specific direction of change, such as the effectiveness of a treatment or intervention, it can inform decision-making and guide practical applications in fields such as medicine, psychology, or education.

Enhanced Communication:

Directional hypotheses facilitate clearer communication of research findings. When researchers have made specific predictions about the direction of the relationship or difference, they can effectively communicate their results to both academic and non-academic audiences. This promotes better understanding and application of the research outcomes.

It’s important to note that while directional hypotheses offer advantages, they also require stronger evidence to support them compared to non-directional hypotheses. Researchers should carefully consider the research context, existing literature, and theoretical considerations before formulating a directional hypothesis.

Disadvantages of Directional Hypothesis

While directional hypotheses have their advantages, there are also some potential disadvantages to consider:

Risk of Type I Error:

Directional hypotheses increase the risk of committing a Type I error, also known as a false positive. By focusing on a specific predicted direction, researchers may overlook the possibility of an opposite or null effect. If the actual relationship or difference does not align with the predicted direction, researchers may incorrectly conclude that there is no effect when, in fact, there may be.

Narrow Focus:

Directional hypotheses restrict the scope of investigation to a specific predicted direction. This narrow focus may overlook other potential relationships, nuances, or alternative explanations. Researchers may miss valuable insights or unexpected findings by excluding other possibilities from consideration.

Limited Generalizability:

Directional hypotheses may limit the generalizability of findings. If the study supports the predicted direction, the results may only apply to the specific context and conditions outlined in the hypothesis. Generalizing the findings to different populations, settings, or variables may require further research.

Biased Interpretation:

Directional hypotheses can introduce bias in the interpretation of results. Researchers may be inclined to selectively focus on evidence that supports the predicted direction while downplaying or ignoring contradictory evidence. This can hinder objectivity and lead to biased conclusions.

Increased Sample Size Requirements:

Directional hypotheses often require larger sample sizes compared to non-directional hypotheses. This is because statistical power needs to be sufficient to detect the predicted direction with a reasonable level of confidence. Larger samples can be more time-consuming and resource-intensive to obtain.

Reduced Flexibility:

Directional hypotheses limit flexibility in data analysis and statistical testing. Researchers may feel compelled to use specific statistical tests or analytical approaches that align with the predicted direction, potentially overlooking alternative methods that may be more appropriate or informative.

It’s important to weigh these disadvantages against the specific research context and objectives when deciding whether to use a directional hypothesis. In some cases, a non-directional hypothesis may be more suitable, allowing for a more exploratory and comprehensive investigation of the research question.

Non-Directional Hypothesis:

A non-directional hypothesis, also known as a two-tailed hypothesis, is a type of hypothesis that does not specify the direction of the relationship between variables or the difference between groups. Instead of predicting a specific direction, a non-directional hypothesis suggests that there will be a significant relationship or difference, without indicating whether it will be positive or negative, higher or lower, etc.

The introduction of a non-directional hypothesis in a research study provides an overview of the general prediction being made about the relationship between variables or the difference between groups, without specifying the direction. It sets the stage for the research question and outlines the expectation of a significant relationship or difference. The introduction typically includes the following elements:

Research Context:

Begin by introducing the general topic or research area that the study is focused on. Provide background information and highlight the significance of the research question.

Research Question:

Clearly state the specific research question that the study aims to answer. This question should be directly related to the variables being investigated.

Previous Research:

Summarize relevant literature or previous studies that have explored similar or related topics. This helps establish the existing knowledge base and provides a rationale for the hypothesis.

Hypothesis Statement:

Present the non-directional hypothesis clearly and concisely. State that there is an expected relationship or difference between variables or groups without specifying the direction. For example, if studying the relationship between socioeconomic status and academic achievement, a non-directional hypothesis could be, “There is a significant relationship between socioeconomic status and academic achievement.”

Justification:

Provide a logical explanation for the non-directional hypothesis based on the existing literature or theoretical framework. Discuss any previous findings, theories, or empirical evidence that support the notion of a relationship or difference between the variables or groups.

Objectives:

Outline the specific objectives or aims of the study, which should align with the research question and hypothesis. These objectives help guide the research process and provide a clear focus for the study.

By including these elements in the introduction of a research study, the non-directional hypothesis is introduced effectively, indicating the expectation of a significant relationship or difference without specifying the direction

What is Non-directional hypothesis?

In a non-directional hypothesis, researchers acknowledge that there may be an effect or relationship between variables but do not make a specific prediction about the direction of that effect. This allows for a more exploratory approach to data analysis and interpretation

If a hypothesis does not state a direction but simply says that one factor affects another, or that there is an association or correlation between two variables then it is called a non-directional (two-tailed) hypothesis.

Research Question: Is there a relationship between social media usage and self-esteem?

Non-Directional Hypothesis: There is a significant relationship between social media usage and self-esteem.

In this example, the non-directional hypothesis suggests that there is a relationship between social media usage and self-esteem without specifying whether higher social media usage is associated with higher or lower self-esteem. The hypothesis acknowledges the possibility of an effect but does not make a specific prediction about the direction of that effect.

It’s important to note that this is just one example, and non-directional hypotheses can be formulated in various research areas and contexts. The key is to indicate the expectation of a significant relationship or difference without specifying the direction, allowing for a more exploratory approach to data analysis and interpretation.

Advantages of Non-directional hypothesis

Non-directional hypotheses, also known as two-tailed hypotheses, offer several advantages in research studies. Here are some of the key advantages:

Flexibility in Data Analysis:

Non-directional hypotheses allow for flexibility in data analysis. Researchers are not constrained by a specific predicted direction and can explore the relationship or difference in various ways. This flexibility enables a more comprehensive examination of the data, considering both positive and negative associations or differences.

Objective and Open-Minded Approach:

Non-directional hypotheses promote an objective and open-minded approach to research. Researchers do not have preconceived notions about the direction of the relationship or difference, which helps mitigate biases in data interpretation. They can objectively analyze the data without being influenced by their initial expectations.

Comprehensive Understanding:

By not specifying the direction, non-directional hypotheses facilitate a comprehensive understanding of the relationship or difference being investigated. Researchers can explore and consider all possible outcomes, leading to a more nuanced interpretation of the findings. This broader perspective can provide deeper insights into the research question.

Greater Sensitivity:

Non-directional hypotheses can be more sensitive to detecting unexpected or surprising relationships or differences. Researchers are not solely focused on confirming a specific predicted direction, but rather on uncovering any significant association or difference. This increased sensitivity allows for the identification of novel patterns and relationships that may have been overlooked with a directional hypothesis.

Replication and Generalizability:

Non-directional hypotheses support replication studies and enhance the generalizability of findings. By not restricting the investigation to a specific predicted direction, the results can be more applicable to different populations, contexts, or conditions. This broader applicability strengthens the validity and reliability of the research.

Hypothesis Generation:

Non-directional hypotheses can serve as a foundation for generating new hypotheses and research questions. Significant findings without a specific predicted direction can lead to further investigations and the formulation of more focused directional hypotheses in subsequent studies.

It’s important to consider the specific research context and objectives when deciding between a directional or non-directional hypothesis. Non-directional hypotheses are particularly useful when researchers are exploring new areas or when there is limited existing knowledge about the relationship or difference being studied.

Disadvantages of Non-directional hypothesis

Non-directional hypotheses have their advantages, there are also some potential disadvantages to consider:

Lack of Specificity: Non-directional hypotheses do not provide a specific prediction about the direction of the relationship or difference between variables. This lack of specificity may limit the interpretability and practical implications of the findings. Stakeholders may desire clear guidance on the expected direction of the effect.

Non-directional hypotheses often require larger sample sizes compared to directional hypotheses. This is because statistical power needs to be sufficient to detect any significant relationship or difference, regardless of the direction. Obtaining larger samples can be more time-consuming, resource-intensive, and costly.

Reduced Precision:

By not specifying the direction, non-directional hypotheses may result in less precise findings. Researchers may obtain statistically significant results indicating a relationship or difference, but the lack of direction may hinder their ability to understand the practical implications or mechanism behind the effect.

Potential for Post-hoc Interpretation:

Non-directional hypotheses can increase the risk of post-hoc interpretation of results. Researchers may be tempted to selectively interpret and highlight only the significant findings that support their preconceived notions or expectations, leading to biased interpretations.

Limited Theoretical Guidance:

Non-directional hypotheses may lack theoretical guidance in terms of understanding the underlying mechanisms or causal pathways. Without a specific predicted direction, it can be challenging to develop a comprehensive theoretical framework to explain the relationship or difference being studied.

Potential Missed Opportunities:

Non-directional hypotheses may limit the exploration of specific directions or subgroups within the data. By not focusing on a specific direction, researchers may miss important nuances or interactions that could contribute to a deeper understanding of the phenomenon under investigation.

It’s important to carefully consider the research question, available literature, and research objectives when deciding whether to use a non-directional hypothesis. Depending on the context and goals of the study, a non-directional hypothesis may be appropriate, but researchers should also be aware of the potential limitations and address them accordingly in their research design and interpretation of results.

Difference between directional and non-directional hypothesis

the main difference between a directional hypothesis and a non-directional hypothesis lies in the specificity of the prediction made about the relationship between variables or the difference between groups.

Directional Hypothesis:

A directional hypothesis, also known as a one-tailed hypothesis, makes a specific prediction about the direction of the relationship or difference. It states the expected outcome, whether it is a positive or negative relationship, a higher or lower value, an increase or decrease, etc. The directional hypothesis guides the research in a focused manner, specifying the direction to be tested.

Example: “Students who receive tutoring will demonstrate higher test scores compared to students who do not receive tutoring.”

A non-directional hypothesis, also known as a two-tailed hypothesis, does not specify the direction of the relationship or difference. It acknowledges the possibility of a relationship or difference between variables without predicting a specific direction. The non-directional hypothesis allows for exploration and analysis of both positive and negative associations or differences.

Example: “There is a significant relationship between sleep quality and academic performance.”

In summary, a directional hypothesis makes a specific prediction about the direction of the relationship or difference, while a non-directional hypothesis suggests a relationship or difference without specifying the direction. The choice between the two depends on the research question, existing literature, and the researcher’s objectives. Directional hypotheses provide a focused prediction, while non-directional hypotheses allow for more exploratory analysis.

When to use Directional Hypothesis?

A directional hypothesis is appropriate to use in specific situations where researchers have a clear theoretical or empirical basis for predicting the direction of the relationship or difference between variables. Here are some scenarios where a directional hypothesis is commonly employed:

Prior Research and Theoretical Framework: When previous studies, existing theories, or established empirical evidence strongly suggest a specific direction of the relationship or difference, a directional hypothesis can be formulated. Researchers can build upon the existing knowledge base and make a focused prediction based on this prior information.

Cause-and-Effect Relationships: In studies aiming to establish cause-and-effect relationships, directional hypotheses are often used. When there is a clear theoretical understanding of the causal relationship between variables, researchers can predict the expected direction of the effect based on the proposed mechanism.

Specific Research Objectives: If the research study has specific objectives that require a clear prediction about the direction, a directional hypothesis can be appropriate. For instance, if the aim is to test the effectiveness of a particular intervention or treatment, a directional hypothesis can guide the evaluation by predicting the expected positive or negative outcome.

Practical Applications: Directional hypotheses are useful when the research findings have direct practical implications. For example, in fields such as medicine, psychology, or education, researchers may formulate directional hypotheses to predict the effects of certain interventions or treatments on patient outcomes or educational achievement.

Hypothesis-Testing Approach: Researchers who adopt a hypothesis-testing approach, where they aim to confirm or disconfirm specific predictions, often use directional hypotheses. This approach involves formulating a specific hypothesis and conducting statistical tests to determine whether the data support or refute the predicted direction of the relationship or difference.

When to use non directional hypothesis?

A non-directional hypothesis, also known as a two-tailed hypothesis, is appropriate to use in several situations where researchers do not have a specific prediction about the direction of the relationship or difference between variables. Here are some scenarios where a non-directional hypothesis is commonly employed:

Exploratory Research:

When the research aims to explore a new area or investigate a relationship that has limited prior research or theoretical guidance, a non-directional hypothesis is often used. It allows researchers to gather initial data and insights without being constrained by a specific predicted direction.

Preliminary Studies:

Non-directional hypotheses are useful in preliminary or pilot studies that seek to gather preliminary evidence and generate hypotheses for further investigation. By using a non-directional hypothesis, researchers can gather initial data to inform the development of more specific hypotheses in subsequent studies.

Neutral Expectations:

If researchers have no theoretical or empirical basis to predict the direction of the relationship or difference, a non-directional hypothesis is appropriate. This may occur in situations where there is a lack of prior research, conflicting findings, or inconclusive evidence to support a specific direction.

Comparative Studies:

In studies where the objective is to compare two or more groups or conditions, a non-directional hypothesis is commonly used. The focus is on determining whether a significant difference exists, without making specific predictions about which group or condition will have higher or lower values.

Data-Driven Approach:

When researchers adopt a data-driven or exploratory approach to analysis, non-directional hypotheses are preferred. Instead of testing specific predictions, the aim is to explore the data, identify patterns, and generate hypotheses based on the observed relationships or differences.

Hypothesis-Generating Studies:

Non-directional hypotheses are often used in studies aimed at generating new hypotheses and research questions. By exploring associations or differences without specifying the direction, researchers can identify potential relationships or factors that can serve as a basis for future research.

Strategies to improve directional and non-directional hypothesis

To improve the quality of both directional and non-directional hypotheses, researchers can employ various strategies. Here are some strategies to enhance the formulation of hypotheses:

Strategies to Improve Directional Hypotheses:

Review existing literature:.

Conduct a thorough review of relevant literature to identify previous research findings, theories, and empirical evidence related to the variables of interest. This will help inform and support the formulation of a specific directional hypothesis based on existing knowledge.

Develop a Theoretical Framework:

Build a theoretical framework that outlines the expected causal relationship between variables. The theoretical framework should provide a clear rationale for predicting the direction of the relationship based on established theories or concepts.

Conduct Pilot Studies:

Conducting pilot studies or preliminary research can provide valuable insights and data to inform the formulation of a directional hypothesis. Initial findings can help researchers identify patterns or relationships that support a specific predicted direction.

Seek Expert Input:

Seek input from experts or colleagues in the field who have expertise in the area of study. Discuss the research question and hypothesis with them to obtain valuable insights, perspectives, and feedback that can help refine and improve the directional hypothesis.

Clearly Define Variables:

Clearly define and operationalize the variables in the hypothesis to ensure precision and clarity. This will help avoid ambiguity and ensure that the hypothesis is testable and measurable.

Strategies to Improve Non-Directional Hypotheses:

Preliminary exploration:.

Conduct initial exploratory research to gather preliminary data and insights on the relationship or difference between variables. This can provide a foundation for formulating a non-directional hypothesis based on observed patterns or trends.

Analyze Existing Data:

Analyze existing datasets to identify potential relationships or differences. Exploratory data analysis techniques such as data visualization , descriptive statistics, and correlation analysis can help uncover initial insights that can guide the formulation of a non-directional hypothesis.

Use Exploratory Research Designs:

Employ exploratory research designs such as qualitative studies, case studies, or grounded theory approaches. These designs allow researchers to gather rich data and explore relationships or differences without preconceived notions about the direction.

Consider Alternative Explanations:

When formulating a non-directional hypothesis, consider alternative explanations or potential factors that may influence the relationship or difference between variables. This can help ensure a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the phenomenon under investigation.

Refine Based on Initial Findings:

Refine the non-directional hypothesis based on initial findings and observations from exploratory analyses. These findings can guide the formulation of more specific hypotheses in subsequent studies or inform the direction of further research.

In conclusion, both directional and non-directional hypotheses have their merits and are valuable in different research contexts.

 Here’s a summary of the key points regarding directional and non-directional hypotheses:

• A directional hypothesis makes a specific prediction about the direction of the relationship or difference between variables.
• It is appropriate when there is a clear theoretical or empirical basis for predicting the direction.
• Directional hypotheses provide a focused approach, guiding the research towards confirming or refuting a specific predicted direction.
• They are useful in studies where cause-and-effect relationships are being examined or when specific practical implications are desired.
• Directional hypotheses require careful consideration of prior research, theoretical frameworks, and available evidence.
• A non-directional hypothesis does not specify the direction of the relationship or difference between variables.
• It is employed when there is limited prior knowledge, conflicting findings, or a desire for exploratory analysis.
• Non-directional hypotheses allow for flexibility and open-mindedness in exploring the data, considering both positive and negative associations or differences.
• They are suitable for preliminary studies, exploratory research, or when the research question does not have a clear predicted direction.
• Non-directional hypotheses are beneficial for generating new hypotheses, replication studies, and enhancing generalizability.

In both cases, it is essential to ensure that hypotheses are clear, testable, and aligned with the research objectives. Researchers should also be open to revising and refining hypotheses based on the findings and feedback obtained during the research process. The choice between a directional and non-directional hypothesis depends on factors such as the research question, available literature, theoretical frameworks, and the specific objectives of the study. Researchers should carefully consider these factors to determine the most appropriate type of hypothesis to use in their research

How much did you enjoy this article?

Related articles

Qlik vs Tableau: Which one is better?

Qlik vs Tableau: Choose the Best Analytics Tool. Elevate Your Data Insights for Informed Decisions. Compare Now!

Google Forms vs. SurveyMonkey: Which one is better?

Google Forms vs. SurveyMonkey: Choose the Best Survey Tool. Enhance Data Collection for Informed Insights. Compare and Decide!

Lucidchart vs. Miro: Which one is better?

Deciding between Lucidchart and Miro depends on your specific needs, preferences, and the nature of your projects. Both platforms have their strengths and are well-regarded in their respective areas. 

Looker vs Data Studio: Which one is better?

"Looker" and "Data Studio" are both popular business intelligence and data visualization tools, but they have different features, capabilities, and use cases.

Power BI vs. Domo: Which one is better?

Power BI and Domo are powerful business intelligence (BI) tools offering data visualization, analytics, and reporting capabilities. However, they differ in features, pricing, user interface, and target audience. Let's compare some critical aspects of Power BI and Domo:

Directional Hypothesis: Definition and 10 Examples

A directional hypothesis refers to a type of hypothesis used in statistical testing that predicts a particular direction of the expected relationship between two variables.

In simpler terms, a directional hypothesis is an educated, specific guess about the direction of an outcome—whether an increase, decrease, or a proclaimed difference in variable sets.

For example, in a study investigating the effects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performance, a directional hypothesis might state that as sleep deprivation (Independent Variable) increases, cognitive performance (Dependent Variable) decreases (Killgore, 2010). Such a hypothesis offers a clear, directional relationship whereby a specific increase or decrease is anticipated.

Global warming provides another notable example of a directional hypothesis. A researcher might hypothesize that as carbon dioxide (CO2) levels increase, global temperatures also increase (Thompson, 2010). In this instance, the hypothesis clearly articulates an upward trend for both variables. 

In any given circumstance, it’s imperative that a directional hypothesis is grounded on solid evidence. For instance, the CO2 and global temperature relationship is based on substantial scientific evidence, and not on a random guess or mere speculation (Florides & Christodoulides, 2009).

Directional vs Non-Directional vs Null Hypotheses

A directional hypothesis is generally contrasted to a non-directional hypothesis. Here’s how they compare:

• Directional hypothesis: A directional hypothesis provides a perspective of the expected relationship between variables, predicting the direction of that relationship (either positive, negative, or a specific difference). 
• Non-directional hypothesis: A non-directional hypothesis denotes the possibility of a relationship between two variables ( the independent and dependent variables ), although this hypothesis does not venture a prediction as to the direction of this relationship (Ali & Bhaskar, 2016). For example, a non-directional hypothesis might state that there exists a relationship between a person’s diet (independent variable) and their mood (dependent variable), without indicating whether improvement in diet enhances mood positively or negatively. Overall, the choice between a directional or non-directional hypothesis depends on the known or anticipated link between the variables under consideration in research studies.

Another very important type of hypothesis that we need to know about is a null hypothesis :

• Null hypothesis : The null hypothesis stands as a universality—the hypothesis that there is no observed effect in the population under study, meaning there is no association between variables (or that the differences are down to chance). For instance, a null hypothesis could be constructed around the idea that changing diet (independent variable) has no discernible effect on a person’s mood (dependent variable) (Yan & Su, 2016). This proposition is the one that we aim to disprove in an experiment.

While directional and non-directional hypotheses involve some integrated expectations about the outcomes (either distinct direction or a vague relationship), a null hypothesis operates on the premise of negating such relationships or effects.

The null hypotheses is typically proposed to be negated or disproved by statistical tests, paving way for the acceptance of an alternate hypothesis (either directional or non-directional).

Directional Hypothesis Examples

1. exercise and heart health.

Research suggests that as regular physical exercise (independent variable) increases, the risk of heart disease (dependent variable) decreases (Jakicic, Davis, Rogers, King, Marcus, Helsel, Rickman, Wahed, Belle, 2016). In this example, a directional hypothesis anticipates that the more individuals maintain routine workouts, the lesser would be their odds of developing heart-related disorders. This assumption is based on the underlying fact that routine exercise can help reduce harmful cholesterol levels, regulate blood pressure, and bring about overall health benefits. Thus, a direction – a decrease in heart disease – is expected in relation with an increase in exercise. 

2. Screen Time and Sleep Quality

Another classic instance of a directional hypothesis can be seen in the relationship between the independent variable, screen time (especially before bed), and the dependent variable, sleep quality. This hypothesis predicts that as screen time before bed increases, sleep quality decreases (Chang, Aeschbach, Duffy, Czeisler, 2015). The reasoning behind this hypothesis is the disruptive effect of artificial light (especially blue light from screens) on melatonin production, a hormone needed to regulate sleep. As individuals spend more time exposed to screens before bed, it is predictably hypothesized that their sleep quality worsens. 

3. Job Satisfaction and Employee Turnover

A typical scenario in organizational behavior research posits that as job satisfaction (independent variable) increases, the rate of employee turnover (dependent variable) decreases (Cheng, Jiang, & Riley, 2017). This directional hypothesis emphasizes that an increased level of job satisfaction would lead to a reduced rate of employees leaving the company. The theoretical basis for this hypothesis is that satisfied employees often tend to be more committed to the organization and are less likely to seek employment elsewhere, thus reducing turnover rates.

4. Healthy Eating and Body Weight

Healthy eating, as the independent variable, is commonly thought to influence body weight, the dependent variable, in a positive way. For example, the hypothesis might state that as consumption of healthy foods increases, an individual’s body weight decreases (Framson, Kristal, Schenk, Littman, Zeliadt, & Benitez, 2009). This projection is based on the premise that healthier foods, such as fruits and vegetables, are generally lower in calories than junk food, assisting in weight management.

5. Sun Exposure and Skin Health

The association between sun exposure (independent variable) and skin health (dependent variable) allows for a definitive hypothesis declaring that as sun exposure increases, the risk of skin damage or skin cancer increases (Whiteman, Whiteman, & Green, 2001). The premise aligns with the understanding that overexposure to the sun’s ultraviolet rays can deteriorate skin health, leading to conditions like sunburn or, in extreme cases, skin cancer.

6. Study Hours and Academic Performance

A regularly assessed relationship in academia suggests that as the number of study hours (independent variable) rises, so too does academic performance (dependent variable) (Nonis, Hudson, Logan, Ford, 2013). The hypothesis proposes a positive correlation , with an increase in study time expected to contribute to enhanced academic outcomes.

7. Screen Time and Eye Strain

It’s commonly hypothesized that as screen time (independent variable) increases, the likelihood of experiencing eye strain (dependent variable) also increases (Sheppard & Wolffsohn, 2018). This is based on the idea that prolonged engagement with digital screens—computers, tablets, or mobile phones—can cause discomfort or fatigue in the eyes, attributing to symptoms of eye strain.

8. Physical Activity and Stress Levels

In the sphere of mental health, it’s often proposed that as physical activity (independent variable) increases, levels of stress (dependent variable) decrease (Stonerock, Hoffman, Smith, Blumenthal, 2015). Regular exercise is known to stimulate the production of endorphins, the body’s natural mood elevators, helping to alleviate stress.

9. Water Consumption and Kidney Health

A common health-related hypothesis might predict that as water consumption (independent variable) increases, the risk of kidney stones (dependent variable) decreases (Curhan, Willett, Knight, & Stampfer, 2004). Here, an increase in water intake is inferred to reduce the risk of kidney stones by diluting the substances that lead to stone formation.

10. Traffic Noise and Sleep Quality

In urban planning research, it’s often supposed that as traffic noise (independent variable) increases, sleep quality (dependent variable) decreases (Muzet, 2007). Increased noise levels, particularly during the night, can result in sleep disruptions, thus, leading to poor sleep quality.

11. Sugar Consumption and Dental Health

In the field of dental health, an example might be stating as one’s sugar consumption (independent variable) increases, dental health (dependent variable) decreases (Sheiham, & James, 2014). This stems from the fact that sugar is a major factor in tooth decay, and increased consumption of sugary foods or drinks leads to a decline in dental health due to the high likelihood of cavities.

See 15 More Examples of Hypotheses Here

A directional hypothesis plays a critical role in research, paving the way for specific predicted outcomes based on the relationship between two variables. These hypotheses clearly illuminate the expected direction—the increase or decrease—of an effect. From predicting the impacts of healthy eating on body weight to forecasting the influence of screen time on sleep quality, directional hypotheses allow for targeted and strategic examination of phenomena. In essence, directional hypotheses provide the crucial path for inquiry, shaping the trajectory of research studies and ultimately aiding in the generation of insightful, relevant findings.

Ali, S., & Bhaskar, S. (2016). Basic statistical tools in research and data analysis. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia, 60 (9), 662-669. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103%2F0019-5049.190623  

Chang, A. M., Aeschbach, D., Duffy, J. F., & Czeisler, C. A. (2015). Evening use of light-emitting eReaders negatively affects sleep, circadian timing, and next-morning alertness. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences, 112 (4), 1232-1237. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1418490112  

Cheng, G. H. L., Jiang, D., & Riley, J. H. (2017). Organizational commitment and intrinsic motivation of regular and contractual primary school teachers in China. New Psychology, 19 (3), 316-326. Doi: https://doi.org/10.4103%2F2249-4863.184631  

Curhan, G. C., Willett, W. C., Knight, E. L., & Stampfer, M. J. (2004). Dietary factors and the risk of incident kidney stones in younger women: Nurses’ Health Study II. Archives of Internal Medicine, 164 (8), 885–891.

Florides, G. A., & Christodoulides, P. (2009). Global warming and carbon dioxide through sciences. Environment international , 35 (2), 390-401. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2008.07.007

Framson, C., Kristal, A. R., Schenk, J. M., Littman, A. J., Zeliadt, S., & Benitez, D. (2009). Development and validation of the mindful eating questionnaire. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 109 (8), 1439-1444. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jada.2009.05.006  

Jakicic, J. M., Davis, K. K., Rogers, R. J., King, W. C., Marcus, M. D., Helsel, D., … & Belle, S. H. (2016). Effect of wearable technology combined with a lifestyle intervention on long-term weight loss: The IDEA randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 316 (11), 1161-1171.

Khan, S., & Iqbal, N. (2013). Study of the relationship between study habits and academic achievement of students: A case of SPSS model. Higher Education Studies, 3 (1), 14-26.

Killgore, W. D. (2010). Effects of sleep deprivation on cognition. Progress in brain research , 185 , 105-129. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53702-7.00007-5  

Marczinski, C. A., & Fillmore, M. T. (2014). Dissociative antagonistic effects of caffeine on alcohol-induced impairment of behavioral control. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 22 (4), 298–311. doi: https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/1064-1297.11.3.228  

Muzet, A. (2007). Environmental Noise, Sleep and Health. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 11 (2), 135-142. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smrv.2006.09.001  

Nonis, S. A., Hudson, G. I., Logan, L. B., & Ford, C. W. (2013). Influence of perceived control over time on college students’ stress and stress-related outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 54 (5), 536-552. doi: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018753706925  

Sheiham, A., & James, W. P. (2014). A new understanding of the relationship between sugars, dental caries and fluoride use: implications for limits on sugars consumption. Public health nutrition, 17 (10), 2176-2184. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S136898001400113X  

Sheppard, A. L., & Wolffsohn, J. S. (2018). Digital eye strain: prevalence, measurement and amelioration. BMJ open ophthalmology , 3 (1), e000146. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2018-000146

Stonerock, G. L., Hoffman, B. M., Smith, P. J., & Blumenthal, J. A. (2015). Exercise as Treatment for Anxiety: Systematic Review and Analysis. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 49 (4), 542–556. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-014-9685-9  

Thompson, L. G. (2010). Climate change: The evidence and our options. The Behavior Analyst , 33 , 153-170. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392211  

Whiteman, D. C., Whiteman, C. A., & Green, A. C. (2001). Childhood sun exposure as a risk factor for melanoma: a systematic review of epidemiologic studies. Cancer Causes & Control, 12 (1), 69-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008980919928

Yan, X., & Su, X. (2009). Linear regression analysis: theory and computing . New Jersey: World Scientific.

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Animism Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 10 Magical Thinking Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ Social-Emotional Learning (Definition, Examples, Pros & Cons)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ What is Educational Psychology?

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

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

Statistics Made Easy

What is a Directional Hypothesis? (Definition & Examples)

A statistical hypothesis is an assumption about a population parameter . For example, we may assume that the mean height of a male in the U.S. is 70 inches.

The assumption about the height is the statistical hypothesis and the true mean height of a male in the U.S. is the population parameter .

To test whether a statistical hypothesis about a population parameter is true, we obtain a random sample from the population and perform a hypothesis test on the sample data.

Whenever we perform a hypothesis test, we always write down a null and alternative hypothesis:

• Null Hypothesis (H 0 ): The sample data occurs purely from chance.
• Alternative Hypothesis (H A ): The sample data is influenced by some non-random cause.

A hypothesis test can either contain a directional hypothesis or a non-directional hypothesis:

• Directional hypothesis: The alternative hypothesis contains the less than (“<“) or greater than (“>”) sign. This indicates that we’re testing whether or not there is a positive or negative effect.
• Non-directional hypothesis: The alternative hypothesis contains the not equal (“≠”) sign. This indicates that we’re testing whether or not there is some effect, without specifying the direction of the effect.

Note that directional hypothesis tests are also called “one-tailed” tests and non-directional hypothesis tests are also called “two-tailed” tests.

Check out the following examples to gain a better understanding of directional vs. non-directional hypothesis tests.

Example 1: Baseball Programs

A baseball coach believes a certain 4-week program will increase the mean hitting percentage of his players, which is currently 0.285.

To test this, he measures the hitting percentage of each of his players before and after participating in the program.

He then performs a hypothesis test using the following hypotheses:

• H 0 : μ = .285 (the program will have no effect on the mean hitting percentage)
• H A : μ > .285 (the program will cause mean hitting percentage to increase)

This is an example of a directional hypothesis because the alternative hypothesis contains the greater than “>” sign. The coach believes that the program will influence the mean hitting percentage of his players in a positive direction.

Example 2: Plant Growth

A biologist believes that a certain pesticide will cause plants to grow less during a one-month period than they normally do, which is currently 10 inches.

To test this, she applies the pesticide to each of the plants in her laboratory for one month.

She then performs a hypothesis test using the following hypotheses:

• H 0 : μ = 10 inches (the pesticide will have no effect on the mean plant growth)
• H A : μ < 10 inches (the pesticide will cause mean plant growth to decrease)

This is also an example of a directional hypothesis because the alternative hypothesis contains the less than “<” sign. The biologist believes that the pesticide will influence the mean plant growth in a negative direction.

Example 3: Studying Technique

A professor believes that a certain studying technique will influence the mean score that her students receive on a certain exam, but she’s unsure if it will increase or decrease the mean score, which is currently 82.

To test this, she lets each student use the studying technique for one month leading up to the exam and then administers the same exam to each of the students.

• H 0 : μ = 82 (the studying technique will have no effect on the mean exam score)
• H A : μ ≠ 82 (the studying technique will cause the mean exam score to be different than 82)

This is an example of a non-directional hypothesis because the alternative hypothesis contains the not equal “≠” sign. The professor believes that the studying technique will influence the mean exam score, but doesn’t specify whether it will cause the mean score to increase or decrease.

Additional Resources

Introduction to Hypothesis Testing Introduction to the One Sample t-test Introduction to the Two Sample t-test Introduction to the Paired Samples t-test

Featured Posts

Hey there. My name is Zach Bobbitt. I have a Masters of Science degree in Applied Statistics and I’ve worked on machine learning algorithms for professional businesses in both healthcare and retail. I’m passionate about statistics, machine learning, and data visualization and I created Statology to be a resource for both students and teachers alike.  My goal with this site is to help you learn statistics through using simple terms, plenty of real-world examples, and helpful illustrations.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Join the Statology Community

Sign up to receive Statology's exclusive study resource: 100 practice problems with step-by-step solutions. Plus, get our latest insights, tutorials, and data analysis tips straight to your inbox!

By subscribing you accept Statology's Privacy Policy.

Directional vs. Non-Directional Hypothesis in Research

In the world of research and statistical analysis, formulating hypotheses is a crucial step in the scientific process. Hypotheses guide researchers in making predictions and testing relationships between variables. When it comes to hypotheses, there are two main types: directional and non-directional.

In this blog post, we will explore the differences between Directional vs. Non-Directional Hypothesis in Research and their implications in research.

• Table of Contents

Directional Hypothesis

A directional hypothesis, also known as a one-tailed hypothesis, is formulated with a specific predicted direction of the relationship between variables. It indicates an expectation of the relationship being either positive or negative.

The directional hypothesis is often used when there is prior knowledge or theoretical reasoning supporting the predicted direction of the relationship. It allows researchers to make more specific predictions and draw conclusions based on the expected direction of the effect.

Example of Directional Hypothesis

For example, a directional hypothesis might state that “increased physical activity will lead to a decrease in body weight.” Here, the researcher expects a negative relationship between physical activity and body weight.

Advantages of Directional Hypothesis

• Specific predictions: Directional hypotheses provide a clear prediction of the expected relationship between variables, allowing for a focused investigation.
• Increased statistical power: By focusing on one direction of the relationship, researchers can allocate more statistical power to that specific direction, increasing the chances of detecting a significant effect if it exists.

Non-Directional Hypothesis

A non-directional hypothesis, also known as a two-tailed hypothesis, does not make a specific prediction about the direction of the relationship between variables. Instead, it states that there is a relationship, but without indicating whether it will be positive or negative.

Non-directional hypotheses are often used when there is insufficient prior knowledge or theoretical basis to predict the direction of the relationship. It allows for a more exploratory approach, where the researcher is open to discovering the nature of the relationship through data analysis .

Read More: Internal Validity vs External Validity | Examples

Example of Non-Directional Hypothesis

For example, a non-directional hypothesis might state that “there is a relationship between caffeine consumption and reaction time.” Here, the researcher expects a relationship between the variables but does not specify the direction.

Read More: Population vs Sample | Examples

Advantages of Non-Directional Hypothesis:

• Flexibility: Non-directional hypotheses provide flexibility in exploring relationships between variables without preconceived notions about the direction of the effect.
• Open to unexpected findings : By not specifying the direction, researchers remain open to unexpected results or alternative explanations that may emerge during the analysis.

Difference Between Directional and Non-Directional Hypotheses

Choosing Between Directional and Non-Directional Hypotheses: The choice between a directional and non-directional hypothesis depends on the research question, existing knowledge, and theoretical background. Here are a few considerations for selecting the appropriate type of hypothesis:

• Prior research: If previous studies have established a clear direction of the relationship, a directional hypothesis may be more appropriate.
• Theoretical reasoning: If there is a strong theoretical foundation supporting a specific direction, a directional hypothesis can provide a focused investigation.
• Exploratory nature: If the research question is exploratory or lacks prior knowledge, a non-directional hypothesis allows for a more open-ended investigation.

Read More: Reliability vs Validity | Examples

• Directional vs. Non-Directional Hypothesis

Formulating hypotheses is an essential step in the research process, guiding researchers in testing relationships between variables.

Directional hypotheses offer specific predictions about the expected direction of the relationship, whereas non-directional hypotheses allow for more exploratory investigations without preconceived notions of the direction.

The choice between these types of hypotheses depends on the research question, prior knowledge, and theoretical background.

By understanding the distinctions between directional and non-directional hypotheses, researchers can effectively formulate hypotheses that align with their research goals and contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge.

Remember, hypotheses serve as a roadmap for research, and regardless of their type, they play a crucial role in scientific inquiry and the pursuit of knowledge.

Other articles

Please read through some of our other articles with examples and explanations if you’d like to learn more about research methodology.

Comparision

• Basic and Applied Research
• Cross-Sectional vs Longitudinal Studies
• Survey vs Questionnaire
• Open Ended vs Closed Ended Questions
• Experimental and Non-Experimental Research
• Inductive vs Deductive Approach
• Null and Alternative Hypothesis
• Reliability vs Validity
• Population vs Sample
• Conceptual Framework and Theoretical Framework
• Bibliography and Reference
• Stratified vs Cluster Sampling
• Sampling Error vs Sampling Bias
• Internal Validity vs External Validity
• Full-Scale, Laboratory-Scale and Pilot-Scale Studies
• Plagiarism and Paraphrasing
• Research Methodology Vs. Research Method
• Mediator and Moderator
• Type I vs Type II error
• Descriptive and Inferential Statistics
• Microsoft Excel and SPSS
• Parametric and Non-Parametric Test
• Independent vs. Dependent Variable – MIM Learnovate
• Research Article and Research Paper
• Proposition and Hypothesis
• Principal Component Analysis and Partial Least Squares
• Academic Research vs Industry Research
• Clinical Research vs Lab Research
• Research Lab and Hospital Lab
• Thesis Statement and Research Question
• Quantitative Researchers vs. Quantitative Traders
• Premise, Hypothesis and Supposition
• Survey Vs Experiment
• Hypothesis and Theory
• Independent vs. Dependent Variable
• APA vs. MLA
• Ghost Authorship vs. Gift Authorship
• Research Methods
• Quantitative Research
• Qualitative Research
• Case Study Research
• Survey Research
• Conclusive Research
• Descriptive Research
• Cross-Sectional Research
• Theoretical Framework
• Conceptual Framework
• Triangulation
• Grounded Theory
• Quasi-Experimental Design
• Mixed Method
• Correlational Research
• Randomized Controlled Trial
• Stratified Sampling
• Ethnography
• Ghost Authorship
• Secondary Data Collection
• Primary Data Collection
• Ex-Post-Facto
•   Dissertation Topic
• Thesis Statement
• Research Proposal
• Research Questions
• Research Problem
• Research Gap
• Types of Research Gaps
• Operationalization of Variables
• Literature Review
• Research Hypothesis
• Questionnaire
• Reliability
• Measurement of Scale
• Sampling Techniques
• Acknowledgements
• PLS-SEM model
• Principal Components Analysis
• Multivariate Analysis
• Friedman Test
• Chi-Square Test (Χ²)
• Effect Size

Related Posts

Survey sampling: what it is, types & tips, cluster sampling | method and examples, who is a good peer reviewer, peer review | types of peer review, ethics in research: safeguarding integrity and credibility, advantages and disadvantages of snowball sampling, exploring qualitative researcher skills: what they are and how to develop them, difference between quota sampling and stratified sampling, how effective laboratory design impacts health, safety, and productivity, why is laboratory safety important in research, leave a reply cancel reply.

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

Directional Hypothesis

Definition:

A directional hypothesis is a specific type of hypothesis statement in which the researcher predicts the direction or effect of the relationship between two variables.

Key Features

1. Predicts direction:

Unlike a non-directional hypothesis, which simply states that there is a relationship between two variables, a directional hypothesis specifies the expected direction of the relationship.

2. Involves one-tailed test:

Directional hypotheses typically require a one-tailed statistical test, as they are concerned with whether the relationship is positive or negative, rather than simply whether a relationship exists.

3. Example:

An example of a directional hypothesis would be: “Increasing levels of exercise will result in greater weight loss.”

4. Researcher’s prior belief:

A directional hypothesis is often formed based on the researcher’s prior knowledge, theoretical understanding, or previous empirical evidence relating to the variables under investigation.

5. Confirmatory nature:

Directional hypotheses are considered confirmatory, as they provide a specific prediction that can be tested statistically, allowing researchers to either support or reject the hypothesis.

6. Advantages and disadvantages:

Directional hypotheses help focus the research by explicitly stating the expected relationship, but they can also limit exploration of alternative explanations or unexpected findings.

Directional vs Non-Directional Hypothesis – Collect Feedback More Effectively 

To conduct a perfect survey, you should know the basics of good research . That’s why in Startquestion we would like to share with you our knowledge about basic terms connected to online surveys and feedback gathering . Knowing the basis you can create surveys and conduct research in more effective ways and thanks to this get meaningful feedback from your customers, employees, and users. That’s enough for the introduction – let’s get to work. This time we will tell you about the hypothesis .

What is a Hypothesis?

A Hypothesis can be described as a theoretical statement built upon some evidence so that it can be tested as if it is true or false. In other words, a hypothesis is a speculation or an idea, based on insufficient evidence that allows it further analysis and experimentation.  

The purpose of a hypothetical statement is to work like a prediction based on studied research and to provide some estimated results before it ha happens in a real position. There can be more than one hypothesis statement involved in a research study, where you need to question and explore different aspects of a proposed research topic. Before putting your research into directional vs non-directional hypotheses, let’s have some basic knowledge.

Most often, a hypothesis describes a relation between two or more variables. It includes:

An Independent variable – One that is controlled by the researcher

Dependent Variable – The variable that the researcher observes in association with the Independent variable.

Try one of the best survey tools for free!

Start trial period without any credit card or subscription. Easily conduct your research and gather feedback via link, social media, email, and more.

Create first survey

No credit card required · Cancel any time · GDRP Compilant

How to write an effective Hypothesis?

To write an effective hypothesis follow these essential steps.

• Inquire a Question

The very first step in writing an effective hypothesis is raising a question. Outline the research question very carefully keeping your research purpose in mind. Build it in a precise and targeted way. Here you must be clear about the research question vs hypothesis. A research question is the very beginning point of writing an effective hypothesis.

Do Literature Review

Once you are done with constructing your research question, you can start the literature review. A literature review is a collection of preliminary research studies done on the same or relevant topics. There is a diversified range of literature reviews. The most common ones are academic journals but it is not confined to that. It can be anything including your research, data collection, and observation.

At this point, you can build a conceptual framework. It can be defined as a visual representation of the estimated relationship between two variables subjected to research.

Frame an Answer

After a collection of literature reviews, you can find ways how to answer the question. Expect this stage as a point where you will be able to make a stand upon what you believe might have the exact outcome of your research. You must formulate this answer statement clearly and concisely.

Build a Hypothesis

At this point, you can firmly build your hypothesis. By now, you knew the answer to your question so make a hypothesis that includes:

• Applicable Variables                     
• Particular Group being Studied (Who/What)
• Probable Outcome of the Experiment

Remember, your hypothesis is a calculated assumption, it has to be constructed as a sentence, not a question. This is where research question vs hypothesis starts making sense.

Refine a Hypothesis

Make necessary amendments to the constructed hypothesis keeping in mind that it has to be targeted and provable. Moreover, you might encounter certain circumstances where you will be studying the difference between one or more groups. It can be correlational research. In such instances, you must have to testify the relationships that you believe you will find in the subject variables and through this research.

Build Null Hypothesis

Certain research studies require some statistical investigation to perform a data collection. Whenever applying any scientific method to construct a hypothesis, you must have adequate knowledge of the Null Hypothesis and an Alternative hypothesis.

Null Hypothesis: 

A null Hypothesis denotes that there is no statistical relationship between the subject variables. It is applicable for a single group of variables or two groups of variables. A Null Hypothesis is denoted as an H0. This is the type of hypothesis that the researcher tries to invalidate. Some of the examples of null hypotheses are:

–        Hyperactivity is not associated with eating sugar.

–        All roses have an equal amount of petals.

–        A person’s preference for a dress is not linked to its color.

Alternative Hypothesis: 

An alternative hypothesis is a statement that is simply inverse or opposite of the null hypothesis and denoted as H1. Simply saying, it is an alternative statement for the null hypothesis. The same examples will go this way as an alternative hypothesis:

–        Hyperactivity is associated with eating sugar.

–        All roses do not have an equal amount of petals.

–        A person’s preference for a dress is linked to its color.

Start your research right now: use professional survey templates

• Brand Awareness Survey
• Survey for the thesis
• Website Evaluation Survey

See more templates

Types of Hypothesis

Apart from null and alternative hypotheses, research hypotheses can be categorized into different types. Let’s have a look at them:

Simple Hypothesis:

This type of hypothesis is used to state a relationship between a particular independent variable and only a dependent variable.

Complex Hypothesis:

A statement that states the relationship between two or more independent variables and two or more dependent variables, is termed a complex hypothesis.

Associative and Causal Hypothesis:

This type of hypothesis involves predicting that there is a point of interdependency between two variables. It says that any kind of change in one variable will cause a change in the other one.  Similarly, a casual hypothesis says that a change in the dependent variable is due to some variations in the independent variable.

Directional vs non-directional hypothesis

Directional hypothesis:.

A hypothesis that is built upon a certain directional relationship between two variables and constructed upon an already existing theory, is called a directional hypothesis. To understand more about what is directional hypothesis here is an example, Girls perform better than boys (‘better than’ shows the direction predicted)

Non-directional Hypothesis:

It involves an open-ended non-directional hypothesis that predicts that the independent variable will influence the dependent variable; however, the nature or direction of a relationship between two subject variables is not defined or clear.

For Example, there will be a difference in the performance of girls & boys (Not defining what kind of difference)

As a professional, we suggest you apply a non-directional alternative hypothesis when you are not sure of the direction of the relationship. Maybe you’re observing potential gender differences on some psychological test, but you don’t know whether men or women would have the higher ratio. Normally, this would say that you are lacking practical knowledge about the proposed variables. A directional test should be more common for tests. 

Author: Ula Kamburov-Niepewna

Updated: 18 November 2022

Top 10 Useful Employee Pulse Survey Tools

This guide explores the goal of pulse surveys, reviews the top tools available for conducting them, and contrasts their benefits with traditional survey methods.

12 Post Event Survey Questions to Ask

After your meticulously planned event concludes, there’s one crucial step left: gathering feedback. Post-event surveys are invaluable tools for understanding attendee experiences, identifying areas for improvement, and maintaining attendee satisfaction.

Yes or No Questions in Online Surveys

This article will discuss the benefits of using yes or no questions, explore common examples, and provide practical tips for using them effectively in your surveys.

Live revision! Join us for our free exam revision livestreams Watch now →

Reference Library

Collections

• See what's new
• All Resources
• Student Resources
• Assessment Resources
• Teaching Resources
• CPD Courses
• Livestreams

Study notes, videos, interactive activities and more!

Psychology news, insights and enrichment

Currated collections of free resources

Browse resources by topic

• All Psychology Resources

Resource Selections

Currated lists of resources

Directional Hypothesis

A directional hypothesis is a one-tailed hypothesis that states the direction of the difference or relationship (e.g. boys are more helpful than girls).

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share by Email

Research Methods: MCQ Revision Test 1 for AQA A Level Psychology

Topic Videos

Example Answers for Research Methods: A Level Psychology, Paper 2, June 2018 (AQA)

Exam Support

Example Answer for Question 14 Paper 2: AS Psychology, June 2017 (AQA)

Model answer for question 11 paper 2: as psychology, june 2016 (aqa), a level psychology topic quiz - research methods.

Quizzes & Activities

Our subjects

• › Criminology
• › Economics
• › Geography
• › Health & Social Care
• › Psychology
• › Sociology
• › Teaching & learning resources
• › Student revision workshops
• › Online student courses
• › CPD for teachers
• › Livestreams
• › Teaching jobs

Boston House, 214 High Street, Boston Spa, West Yorkshire, LS23 6AD Tel: 01937 848885

• › Contact us
• › Terms of use
• › Privacy & cookies

© 2002-2024 Tutor2u Limited. Company Reg no: 04489574. VAT reg no 816865400.