Formulating Research Hypothesis and Objective
- First Online: 01 March 2024
![](http://sektorel.online/777/templates/cheerup/res/banner1.gif)
Cite this chapter
- Animesh Hazari 2
255 Accesses
Formulating a research hypothesis and objectives is the first and foremost step in any research process as they provide a clear direction and purpose for your study. In this chapter, we shall learn about formulating an ideal research hypothesis and objectives. Formulation and development of the hypothesis and objectives take place under the following key steps:
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Subscribe and save.
- Get 10 units per month
- Download Article/Chapter or eBook
- 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
- Cancel anytime
- Available as PDF
- Read on any device
- Instant download
- Own it forever
- Available as EPUB and PDF
- Durable hardcover edition
- Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
- Free shipping worldwide - see info
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Institutional subscriptions
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
College of Health Sciences, Gulf Medical University, Ajman, Ajman, United Arab Emirates
Animesh Hazari
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Rights and permissions
Reprints and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Hazari, A. (2023). Formulating Research Hypothesis and Objective. In: Research Methodology for Allied Health Professionals. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8925-6_4
Download citation
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8925-6_4
Published : 01 March 2024
Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN : 978-981-99-8924-9
Online ISBN : 978-981-99-8925-6
eBook Packages : Medicine Medicine (R0)
Share this chapter
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Publish with us
Policies and ethics
- Find a journal
- Track your research
![formulate the hypothesis pdf U.S. flag](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/coreutils/uswds/img/favicons/favicon-57.png)
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
- Publications
- Account settings
Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .
- Advanced Search
- Journal List
- J Korean Med Sci
- v.36(50); 2021 Dec 27
![formulate the hypothesis pdf Logo of jkms](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/corehtml/pmc/pmcgifs/logo-jkms.jpg)
Formulating Hypotheses for Different Study Designs
Durga prasanna misra.
1 Department of Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India.
Armen Yuri Gasparyan
2 Departments of Rheumatology and Research and Development, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust (Teaching Trust of the University of Birmingham, UK), Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, UK.
Olena Zimba
3 Department of Internal Medicine #2, Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, Lviv, Ukraine.
Marlen Yessirkepov
4 Department of Biology and Biochemistry, South Kazakhstan Medical Academy, Shymkent, Kazakhstan.
Vikas Agarwal
George d. kitas.
5 Centre for Epidemiology versus Arthritis, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Generating a testable working hypothesis is the first step towards conducting original research. Such research may prove or disprove the proposed hypothesis. Case reports, case series, online surveys and other observational studies, clinical trials, and narrative reviews help to generate hypotheses. Observational and interventional studies help to test hypotheses. A good hypothesis is usually based on previous evidence-based reports. Hypotheses without evidence-based justification and a priori ideas are not received favourably by the scientific community. Original research to test a hypothesis should be carefully planned to ensure appropriate methodology and adequate statistical power. While hypotheses can challenge conventional thinking and may be controversial, they should not be destructive. A hypothesis should be tested by ethically sound experiments with meaningful ethical and clinical implications. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has brought into sharp focus numerous hypotheses, some of which were proven (e.g. effectiveness of corticosteroids in those with hypoxia) while others were disproven (e.g. ineffectiveness of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin).
Graphical Abstract
![An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is jkms-36-e338-abf001.jpg An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is jkms-36-e338-abf001.jpg](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8728594/bin/jkms-36-e338-abf001.jpg)
DEFINING WORKING AND STANDALONE SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES
Science is the systematized description of natural truths and facts. Routine observations of existing life phenomena lead to the creative thinking and generation of ideas about mechanisms of such phenomena and related human interventions. Such ideas presented in a structured format can be viewed as hypotheses. After generating a hypothesis, it is necessary to test it to prove its validity. Thus, hypothesis can be defined as a proposed mechanism of a naturally occurring event or a proposed outcome of an intervention. 1 , 2
Hypothesis testing requires choosing the most appropriate methodology and adequately powering statistically the study to be able to “prove” or “disprove” it within predetermined and widely accepted levels of certainty. This entails sample size calculation that often takes into account previously published observations and pilot studies. 2 , 3 In the era of digitization, hypothesis generation and testing may benefit from the availability of numerous platforms for data dissemination, social networking, and expert validation. Related expert evaluations may reveal strengths and limitations of proposed ideas at early stages of post-publication promotion, preventing the implementation of unsupported controversial points. 4
Thus, hypothesis generation is an important initial step in the research workflow, reflecting accumulating evidence and experts' stance. In this article, we overview the genesis and importance of scientific hypotheses and their relevance in the era of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.
DO WE NEED HYPOTHESES FOR ALL STUDY DESIGNS?
Broadly, research can be categorized as primary or secondary. In the context of medicine, primary research may include real-life observations of disease presentations and outcomes. Single case descriptions, which often lead to new ideas and hypotheses, serve as important starting points or justifications for case series and cohort studies. The importance of case descriptions is particularly evident in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic when unique, educational case reports have heralded a new era in clinical medicine. 5
Case series serve similar purpose to single case reports, but are based on a slightly larger quantum of information. Observational studies, including online surveys, describe the existing phenomena at a larger scale, often involving various control groups. Observational studies include variable-scale epidemiological investigations at different time points. Interventional studies detail the results of therapeutic interventions.
Secondary research is based on already published literature and does not directly involve human or animal subjects. Review articles are generated by secondary research. These could be systematic reviews which follow methods akin to primary research but with the unit of study being published papers rather than humans or animals. Systematic reviews have a rigid structure with a mandatory search strategy encompassing multiple databases, systematic screening of search results against pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, critical appraisal of study quality and an optional component of collating results across studies quantitatively to derive summary estimates (meta-analysis). 6 Narrative reviews, on the other hand, have a more flexible structure. Systematic literature searches to minimise bias in selection of articles are highly recommended but not mandatory. 7 Narrative reviews are influenced by the authors' viewpoint who may preferentially analyse selected sets of articles. 8
In relation to primary research, case studies and case series are generally not driven by a working hypothesis. Rather, they serve as a basis to generate a hypothesis. Observational or interventional studies should have a hypothesis for choosing research design and sample size. The results of observational and interventional studies further lead to the generation of new hypotheses, testing of which forms the basis of future studies. Review articles, on the other hand, may not be hypothesis-driven, but form fertile ground to generate future hypotheses for evaluation. Fig. 1 summarizes which type of studies are hypothesis-driven and which lead on to hypothesis generation.
![Click on image to zoom An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is jkms-36-e338-g001.jpg](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8728594/bin/jkms-36-e338-g001.jpg)
STANDARDS OF WORKING AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES
A review of the published literature did not enable the identification of clearly defined standards for working and scientific hypotheses. It is essential to distinguish influential versus not influential hypotheses, evidence-based hypotheses versus a priori statements and ideas, ethical versus unethical, or potentially harmful ideas. The following points are proposed for consideration while generating working and scientific hypotheses. 1 , 2 Table 1 summarizes these points.
Points to be considered while evaluating the validity of hypotheses |
---|
Backed by evidence-based data |
Testable by relevant study designs |
Supported by preliminary (pilot) studies |
Testable by ethical studies |
Maintaining a balance between scientific temper and controversy |
Evidence-based data
A scientific hypothesis should have a sound basis on previously published literature as well as the scientist's observations. Randomly generated (a priori) hypotheses are unlikely to be proven. A thorough literature search should form the basis of a hypothesis based on published evidence. 7
Unless a scientific hypothesis can be tested, it can neither be proven nor be disproven. Therefore, a scientific hypothesis should be amenable to testing with the available technologies and the present understanding of science.
Supported by pilot studies
If a hypothesis is based purely on a novel observation by the scientist in question, it should be grounded on some preliminary studies to support it. For example, if a drug that targets a specific cell population is hypothesized to be useful in a particular disease setting, then there must be some preliminary evidence that the specific cell population plays a role in driving that disease process.
Testable by ethical studies
The hypothesis should be testable by experiments that are ethically acceptable. 9 For example, a hypothesis that parachutes reduce mortality from falls from an airplane cannot be tested using a randomized controlled trial. 10 This is because it is obvious that all those jumping from a flying plane without a parachute would likely die. Similarly, the hypothesis that smoking tobacco causes lung cancer cannot be tested by a clinical trial that makes people take up smoking (since there is considerable evidence for the health hazards associated with smoking). Instead, long-term observational studies comparing outcomes in those who smoke and those who do not, as was performed in the landmark epidemiological case control study by Doll and Hill, 11 are more ethical and practical.
Balance between scientific temper and controversy
Novel findings, including novel hypotheses, particularly those that challenge established norms, are bound to face resistance for their wider acceptance. Such resistance is inevitable until the time such findings are proven with appropriate scientific rigor. However, hypotheses that generate controversy are generally unwelcome. For example, at the time the pandemic of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and AIDS was taking foot, there were numerous deniers that refused to believe that HIV caused AIDS. 12 , 13 Similarly, at a time when climate change is causing catastrophic changes to weather patterns worldwide, denial that climate change is occurring and consequent attempts to block climate change are certainly unwelcome. 14 The denialism and misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic, including unfortunate examples of vaccine hesitancy, are more recent examples of controversial hypotheses not backed by science. 15 , 16 An example of a controversial hypothesis that was a revolutionary scientific breakthrough was the hypothesis put forth by Warren and Marshall that Helicobacter pylori causes peptic ulcers. Initially, the hypothesis that a microorganism could cause gastritis and gastric ulcers faced immense resistance. When the scientists that proposed the hypothesis themselves ingested H. pylori to induce gastritis in themselves, only then could they convince the wider world about their hypothesis. Such was the impact of the hypothesis was that Barry Marshall and Robin Warren were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2005 for this discovery. 17 , 18
DISTINGUISHING THE MOST INFLUENTIAL HYPOTHESES
Influential hypotheses are those that have stood the test of time. An archetype of an influential hypothesis is that proposed by Edward Jenner in the eighteenth century that cowpox infection protects against smallpox. While this observation had been reported for nearly a century before this time, it had not been suitably tested and publicised until Jenner conducted his experiments on a young boy by demonstrating protection against smallpox after inoculation with cowpox. 19 These experiments were the basis for widespread smallpox immunization strategies worldwide in the 20th century which resulted in the elimination of smallpox as a human disease today. 20
Other influential hypotheses are those which have been read and cited widely. An example of this is the hygiene hypothesis proposing an inverse relationship between infections in early life and allergies or autoimmunity in adulthood. An analysis reported that this hypothesis had been cited more than 3,000 times on Scopus. 1
LESSONS LEARNED FROM HYPOTHESES AMIDST THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
The COVID-19 pandemic devastated the world like no other in recent memory. During this period, various hypotheses emerged, understandably so considering the public health emergency situation with innumerable deaths and suffering for humanity. Within weeks of the first reports of COVID-19, aberrant immune system activation was identified as a key driver of organ dysfunction and mortality in this disease. 21 Consequently, numerous drugs that suppress the immune system or abrogate the activation of the immune system were hypothesized to have a role in COVID-19. 22 One of the earliest drugs hypothesized to have a benefit was hydroxychloroquine. Hydroxychloroquine was proposed to interfere with Toll-like receptor activation and consequently ameliorate the aberrant immune system activation leading to pathology in COVID-19. 22 The drug was also hypothesized to have a prophylactic role in preventing infection or disease severity in COVID-19. It was also touted as a wonder drug for the disease by many prominent international figures. However, later studies which were well-designed randomized controlled trials failed to demonstrate any benefit of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19. 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 Subsequently, azithromycin 27 , 28 and ivermectin 29 were hypothesized as potential therapies for COVID-19, but were not supported by evidence from randomized controlled trials. The role of vitamin D in preventing disease severity was also proposed, but has not been proven definitively until now. 30 , 31 On the other hand, randomized controlled trials identified the evidence supporting dexamethasone 32 and interleukin-6 pathway blockade with tocilizumab as effective therapies for COVID-19 in specific situations such as at the onset of hypoxia. 33 , 34 Clues towards the apparent effectiveness of various drugs against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in vitro but their ineffectiveness in vivo have recently been identified. Many of these drugs are weak, lipophilic bases and some others induce phospholipidosis which results in apparent in vitro effectiveness due to non-specific off-target effects that are not replicated inside living systems. 35 , 36
Another hypothesis proposed was the association of the routine policy of vaccination with Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) with lower deaths due to COVID-19. This hypothesis emerged in the middle of 2020 when COVID-19 was still taking foot in many parts of the world. 37 , 38 Subsequently, many countries which had lower deaths at that time point went on to have higher numbers of mortality, comparable to other areas of the world. Furthermore, the hypothesis that BCG vaccination reduced COVID-19 mortality was a classic example of ecological fallacy. Associations between population level events (ecological studies; in this case, BCG vaccination and COVID-19 mortality) cannot be directly extrapolated to the individual level. Furthermore, such associations cannot per se be attributed as causal in nature, and can only serve to generate hypotheses that need to be tested at the individual level. 39
IS TRADITIONAL PEER REVIEW EFFICIENT FOR EVALUATION OF WORKING AND SCIENTIFIC HYPOTHESES?
Traditionally, publication after peer review has been considered the gold standard before any new idea finds acceptability amongst the scientific community. Getting a work (including a working or scientific hypothesis) reviewed by experts in the field before experiments are conducted to prove or disprove it helps to refine the idea further as well as improve the experiments planned to test the hypothesis. 40 A route towards this has been the emergence of journals dedicated to publishing hypotheses such as the Central Asian Journal of Medical Hypotheses and Ethics. 41 Another means of publishing hypotheses is through registered research protocols detailing the background, hypothesis, and methodology of a particular study. If such protocols are published after peer review, then the journal commits to publishing the completed study irrespective of whether the study hypothesis is proven or disproven. 42 In the post-pandemic world, online research methods such as online surveys powered via social media channels such as Twitter and Instagram might serve as critical tools to generate as well as to preliminarily test the appropriateness of hypotheses for further evaluation. 43 , 44
Some radical hypotheses might be difficult to publish after traditional peer review. These hypotheses might only be acceptable by the scientific community after they are tested in research studies. Preprints might be a way to disseminate such controversial and ground-breaking hypotheses. 45 However, scientists might prefer to keep their hypotheses confidential for the fear of plagiarism of ideas, avoiding online posting and publishing until they have tested the hypotheses.
SUGGESTIONS ON GENERATING AND PUBLISHING HYPOTHESES
Publication of hypotheses is important, however, a balance is required between scientific temper and controversy. Journal editors and reviewers might keep in mind these specific points, summarized in Table 2 and detailed hereafter, while judging the merit of hypotheses for publication. Keeping in mind the ethical principle of primum non nocere, a hypothesis should be published only if it is testable in a manner that is ethically appropriate. 46 Such hypotheses should be grounded in reality and lend themselves to further testing to either prove or disprove them. It must be considered that subsequent experiments to prove or disprove a hypothesis have an equal chance of failing or succeeding, akin to tossing a coin. A pre-conceived belief that a hypothesis is unlikely to be proven correct should not form the basis of rejection of such a hypothesis for publication. In this context, hypotheses generated after a thorough literature search to identify knowledge gaps or based on concrete clinical observations on a considerable number of patients (as opposed to random observations on a few patients) are more likely to be acceptable for publication by peer-reviewed journals. Also, hypotheses should be considered for publication or rejection based on their implications for science at large rather than whether the subsequent experiments to test them end up with results in favour of or against the original hypothesis.
Points to be considered before a hypothesis is acceptable for publication |
---|
Experiments required to test hypotheses should be ethically acceptable as per the World Medical Association declaration on ethics and related statements |
Pilot studies support hypotheses |
Single clinical observations and expert opinion surveys may support hypotheses |
Testing hypotheses requires robust methodology and statistical power |
Hypotheses that challenge established views and concepts require proper evidence-based justification |
Hypotheses form an important part of the scientific literature. The COVID-19 pandemic has reiterated the importance and relevance of hypotheses for dealing with public health emergencies and highlighted the need for evidence-based and ethical hypotheses. A good hypothesis is testable in a relevant study design, backed by preliminary evidence, and has positive ethical and clinical implications. General medical journals might consider publishing hypotheses as a specific article type to enable more rapid advancement of science.
Disclosure: The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
Author Contributions:
- Data curation: Gasparyan AY, Misra DP, Zimba O, Yessirkepov M, Agarwal V, Kitas GD.
Have a language expert improve your writing
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.
- Knowledge Base
Methodology
- How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples
How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples
Published on May 6, 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 20, 2023.
A hypothesis is a statement that can be tested by scientific research. If you want to test a relationship between two or more variables, you need to write hypotheses before you start your experiment or data collection .
Example: Hypothesis
Daily apple consumption leads to fewer doctor’s visits.
Table of contents
What is a hypothesis, developing a hypothesis (with example), hypothesis examples, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about writing hypotheses.
A hypothesis states your predictions about what your research will find. It is a tentative answer to your research question that has not yet been tested. For some research projects, you might have to write several hypotheses that address different aspects of your research question.
A hypothesis is not just a guess – it should be based on existing theories and knowledge. It also has to be testable, which means you can support or refute it through scientific research methods (such as experiments, observations and statistical analysis of data).
Variables in hypotheses
Hypotheses propose a relationship between two or more types of variables .
- An independent variable is something the researcher changes or controls.
- A dependent variable is something the researcher observes and measures.
If there are any control variables , extraneous variables , or confounding variables , be sure to jot those down as you go to minimize the chances that research bias will affect your results.
In this example, the independent variable is exposure to the sun – the assumed cause . The dependent variable is the level of happiness – the assumed effect .
Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services
Discover proofreading & editing
Step 1. Ask a question
Writing a hypothesis begins with a research question that you want to answer. The question should be focused, specific, and researchable within the constraints of your project.
Step 2. Do some preliminary research
Your initial answer to the question should be based on what is already known about the topic. Look for theories and previous studies to help you form educated assumptions about what your research will find.
At this stage, you might construct a conceptual framework to ensure that you’re embarking on a relevant topic . This can also help you identify which variables you will study and what you think the relationships are between them. Sometimes, you’ll have to operationalize more complex constructs.
![](http://sektorel.online/777/templates/cheerup/res/banner1.gif)
Step 3. Formulate your hypothesis
Now you should have some idea of what you expect to find. Write your initial answer to the question in a clear, concise sentence.
4. Refine your hypothesis
You need to make sure your hypothesis is specific and testable. There are various ways of phrasing a hypothesis, but all the terms you use should have clear definitions, and the hypothesis should contain:
- The relevant variables
- The specific group being studied
- The predicted outcome of the experiment or analysis
5. Phrase your hypothesis in three ways
To identify the variables, you can write a simple prediction in if…then form. The first part of the sentence states the independent variable and the second part states the dependent variable.
In academic research, hypotheses are more commonly phrased in terms of correlations or effects, where you directly state the predicted relationship between variables.
If you are comparing two groups, the hypothesis can state what difference you expect to find between them.
6. Write a null hypothesis
If your research involves statistical hypothesis testing , you will also have to write a null hypothesis . The null hypothesis is the default position that there is no association between the variables. The null hypothesis is written as H 0 , while the alternative hypothesis is H 1 or H a .
- H 0 : The number of lectures attended by first-year students has no effect on their final exam scores.
- H 1 : The number of lectures attended by first-year students has a positive effect on their final exam scores.
Research question | Hypothesis | Null hypothesis |
---|---|---|
What are the health benefits of eating an apple a day? | Increasing apple consumption in over-60s will result in decreasing frequency of doctor’s visits. | Increasing apple consumption in over-60s will have no effect on frequency of doctor’s visits. |
Which airlines have the most delays? | Low-cost airlines are more likely to have delays than premium airlines. | Low-cost and premium airlines are equally likely to have delays. |
Can flexible work arrangements improve job satisfaction? | Employees who have flexible working hours will report greater job satisfaction than employees who work fixed hours. | There is no relationship between working hour flexibility and job satisfaction. |
How effective is high school sex education at reducing teen pregnancies? | Teenagers who received sex education lessons throughout high school will have lower rates of unplanned pregnancy teenagers who did not receive any sex education. | High school sex education has no effect on teen pregnancy rates. |
What effect does daily use of social media have on the attention span of under-16s? | There is a negative between time spent on social media and attention span in under-16s. | There is no relationship between social media use and attention span in under-16s. |
If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.
- Sampling methods
- Simple random sampling
- Stratified sampling
- Cluster sampling
- Likert scales
- Reproducibility
Statistics
- Null hypothesis
- Statistical power
- Probability distribution
- Effect size
- Poisson distribution
Research bias
- Optimism bias
- Cognitive bias
- Implicit bias
- Hawthorne effect
- Anchoring bias
- Explicit bias
Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.
A hypothesis is not just a guess — it should be based on existing theories and knowledge. It also has to be testable, which means you can support or refute it through scientific research methods (such as experiments, observations and statistical analysis of data).
Null and alternative hypotheses are used in statistical hypothesis testing . The null hypothesis of a test always predicts no effect or no relationship between variables, while the alternative hypothesis states your research prediction of an effect or relationship.
Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world using statistics. It is used by scientists to test specific predictions, called hypotheses , by calculating how likely it is that a pattern or relationship between variables could have arisen by chance.
Cite this Scribbr article
If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.
McCombes, S. (2023, November 20). How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 21, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/hypothesis/
Is this article helpful?
Shona McCombes
Other students also liked, construct validity | definition, types, & examples, what is a conceptual framework | tips & examples, operationalization | a guide with examples, pros & cons, what is your plagiarism score.
Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .
Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.
- We're Hiring!
- Help Center
![formulate the hypothesis pdf paper cover thumbnail](https://0.academia-photos.com/attachment_thumbnails/35021770/mini_magick20180815-11426-16pjvxe.png?1534383708)
HYPOTHESIS FORMULATION
![formulate the hypothesis pdf Profile image of Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir](https://0.academia-photos.com/5516215/4804222/20652315/s65_saidna_zulfiqar.bin_tahir.jpg)
The third step in the research process after formulating problem statement and literature review is to formulate hypotheses. The hypothesis is a tentative solution of a problem. The research activities are planned to verify the hypothesis and not to find out the solution of the problem or to seek an answer of a question. It is very essential to a research worker to understand the meaning and nature of hypothesis. This paper will discuss about definition of hypothesis, nature, different of hypothesis and assumption and postulate, function and importance of hypothesis, kind of hypothesis, and formulating hypothesis.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
RELATED TOPICS
- We're Hiring!
- Help Center
- Find new research papers in:
- Health Sciences
- Earth Sciences
- Cognitive Science
- Mathematics
- Computer Science
- Academia ©2024
- Latest News
- Latest Issue
- Asked and Answered
- Legal Rebels
- Modern Law Library
- Bryan Garner on Words
- Intersection
- On Well-Being
- Mind Your Business
- My Path to Law
- Storytelling
- Supreme Court Report
- Adam Banner
- Erwin Chemerinsky
- Marcel Strigberger
- Nicole Black
- Susan Smith Blakely
- Members Who Inspire
- 'Magic spell hypothesis' may explain legalese,…
'Magic spell hypothesis' may explain legalese, researchers say
By Debra Cassens Weiss
August 20, 2024, 3:12 pm CDT
![formulate the hypothesis pdf library of law books](https://www.abajournal.com/images/main_images/shutterstock_243773131.jpg)
Researchers studying the origins of legalese say lawmakers and lawyers may write laws and legal documents in a convoluted manner to confer a “ritualistic, spell-like element” signaling authority. (Image from Shutterstock)
Researchers studying the origins of legalese say lawmakers and lawyers may write laws and legal documents in a convoluted manner to confer a “ritualistic, spell-like element” signaling authority.
The researchers dubbed their conclusion the “magic spell hypothesis,” according to their article published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which is available here .
Courthouse News Service and ScienceDaily covered the findings.
A past study by the researchers noted that legal documents often have “center-embedded syntax” in which clauses are inserted in the center of sentences. The sentence structure makes the text more difficult to understand, even for lawyers.
Researchers wanted to know why, so they designed two experiments to test the magic spell hypothesis and a second “copy-and-edit” hypothesis. The latter posits that writers insert clauses in the middle of sentences when adding information to an initial draft.
In their new study, the researchers asked nonlawyer volunteers to write laws and other kinds of texts. When writing laws, the volunteers used convoluted language and center-embedded text. For other writing tasks, the volunteers used a simpler sentence structure.
“In English culture, if you want to write something that’s a magic spell, people know that the way to do that is you put a lot of old-fashioned rhymes in there,” said senior study author Edward Gibson in an interview with ScienceDaily. “We think maybe center-embedding is signaling legalese in the same way.”
Gibson is a professor of brain and cognitive sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Other study authors are Eric Martínez, a fellow and instructor at the University of Chicago Law School, and Francis Mollica, a lecturer in computational cognitive science at the University of Melbourne in Australia.
In the first experiment, 200 nonlawyer volunteers were asked either to write a law prohibiting a crime or a story describing someone committing that crime. Half of those in each group were given all the details, and the other half were provided with a paired-down description. The paired-down group was then given additional details to add to their text.
There were “striking” differences based on the writing assignment. About 48% of the sentences in laws written by participants had center-embedding, compared to 5.8% of the sentences in the stories.
In a blow to the editing hypothesis, there was little difference in text written with all the details the first time and text in which details were added later.
In the second experiment, 80 nonlawyer participants were told to either write a law banning a crime or to act as a “tour guide” for foreigners by writing a description of it. The results were similar: Participants were more likely to include center-embedding when they wrote laws.
Next up? The researchers plan to analyze British laws that were the basis for American laws to see whether they also included center-embedding. They also plan to analyze the Hammurabi Code.
The researchers are 2022 winners of the satiric “Ig Nobel Prize” for their research on what makes legal documents difficult to understand. That research found that legalese is characterized by unnecessary jargon, passive sentence structure and nonstandard capitalization. But the characteristic that makes legal documents most difficult to read was the center-embedded clause.
According to a September 2022 press release from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a science humor magazine called the Annals of Improbable Research gives out the award. It celebrates “achievements that first make people laugh and then make them think.” The prize is a 10 trillion Zimbabwean dollar bill and a paper trophy.
Related topics:
States | legal history | illinois | massachusetts | international | australia | legal writing | public interest, you might also like:.
- Supreme Court keeps block on Biden's new Title IX regulations in some states
- Company that produced first cultivated meatball sues Florida over ban on lab-grown meat
- 8th Circuit allows Iowa book ban to take effect but rules for challengers on First Amendment issue
- This BigLaw firm tops 'A-List' despite lower gross revenues
Give us feedback, share a story tip or update, or report an error.
- Case Dropped Against Texas Girl, 12, Accused of Police Assault
- Disbarred lawyer Tom Girardi has smaller hippocampus than 98% of population, neurologist testifies
- 5 of 6 lawyer presidents graduated from T-14 law schools; Harris wouldn't be in that group if elected
- Clifford Chance partner wrote 'happily ever after' post before he died in yacht disaster
- Ex-lawyer Tom Girardi's former CFO had escape plan and lavish spending habits, ex-fiancee testifies
Topics: Career & Practice
![formulate the hypothesis pdf formulate the hypothesis pdf](https://www.abajournal.com/images/main_images/fivewomensilhouettes750px.png)
These firms are 'ceiling smashers' for having highest percentage of women in equity partnerships
![formulate the hypothesis pdf formulate the hypothesis pdf](https://www.abajournal.com/images/main_images/Michael_Flowers_headshot_square_800px.jpg)
Lawyers must lead in efforts to preserve accessible, equitable and transparent rule-of-law system
![formulate the hypothesis pdf formulate the hypothesis pdf](https://www.abajournal.com/images/main_images/shutterstock_examclassroom.jpg)
Tests into and out of law schools—what's changing and why
![formulate the hypothesis pdf formulate the hypothesis pdf](https://www.abajournal.com/images/resources/redesign_images/flat-social-media-icons/facebook.png)
Suggestions or feedback?
MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology
- Machine learning
- Sustainability
- Black holes
- Classes and programs
Departments
- Aeronautics and Astronautics
- Brain and Cognitive Sciences
- Architecture
- Political Science
- Mechanical Engineering
Centers, Labs, & Programs
- Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL)
- Picower Institute for Learning and Memory
- Lincoln Laboratory
- School of Architecture + Planning
- School of Engineering
- School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences
- Sloan School of Management
- School of Science
- MIT Schwarzman College of Computing
MIT study explains why laws are written in an incomprehensible style
Press contact :.
![formulate the hypothesis pdf Stack of legal papers and gavel](https://news.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/news_article__image_gallery/public/images/202408/MIT_Layperson-legalese-01_0.jpg?itok=apiXRr9V)
Previous image Next image
Legal documents are notoriously difficult to understand, even for lawyers. This raises the question: Why are these documents written in a style that makes them so impenetrable?
MIT cognitive scientists believe they have uncovered the answer to that question. Just as “magic spells” use special rhymes and archaic terms to signal their power, the convoluted language of legalese acts to convey a sense of authority, they conclude.
In a study appearing this week in the journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , the researchers found that even non-lawyers use this type of language when asked to write laws.
“People seem to understand that there’s an implicit rule that this is how laws should sound, and they write them that way,” says Edward Gibson, an MIT professor of brain and cognitive sciences and the senior author of the study.
Eric Martinez PhD ’24 is the lead author of the study. Francis Mollica, a lecturer at the University of Melbourne, is also an author of the paper .
Casting a legal spell
Gibson’s research group has been studying the unique characteristics of legalese since 2020, when Martinez came to MIT after earning a law degree from Harvard Law School. In a 2022 study , Gibson, Martinez, and Mollica analyzed legal contracts totaling about 3.5 million words, comparing them with other types of writing, including movie scripts, newspaper articles, and academic papers.
That analysis revealed that legal documents frequently have long definitions inserted in the middle of sentences — a feature known as “center-embedding.” Linguists have previously found that this kind of structure can make text much more difficult to understand.
“Legalese somehow has developed this tendency to put structures inside other structures, in a way which is not typical of human languages,” Gibson says.
In a follow-up study published in 2023, the researchers found that legalese also makes documents more difficult for lawyers to understand. Lawyers tended to prefer plain English versions of documents, and they rated those versions to be just as enforceable as traditional legal documents.
“Lawyers also find legalese to be unwieldy and complicated,” Gibson says. “Lawyers don’t like it, laypeople don’t like it, so the point of this current paper was to try and figure out why they write documents this way.”
The researchers had a couple of hypotheses for why legalese is so prevalent. One was the “copy and edit hypothesis,” which suggests that legal documents begin with a simple premise, and then additional information and definitions are inserted into already existing sentences, creating complex center-embedded clauses.
“We thought it was plausible that what happens is you start with an initial draft that’s simple, and then later you think of all these other conditions that you want to include. And the idea is that once you’ve started, it’s much easier to center-embed that into the existing provision,” says Martinez, who is now a fellow and instructor at the University of Chicago Law School.
However, the findings ended up pointing toward a different hypothesis, the so-called “magic spell hypothesis.” Just as magic spells are written with a distinctive style that sets them apart from everyday language, the convoluted style of legal language appears to signal a special kind of authority, the researchers say.
“In English culture, if you want to write something that’s a magic spell, people know that the way to do that is you put a lot of old-fashioned rhymes in there. We think maybe center-embedding is signaling legalese in the same way,” Gibson says.
In this study, the researchers asked about 200 non-lawyers (native speakers of English living in the United States, who were recruited through a crowdsourcing site called Prolific), to write two types of texts. In the first task, people were told to write laws prohibiting crimes such as drunk driving, burglary, arson, and drug trafficking. In the second task, they were asked to write stories about those crimes.
To test the copy and edit hypothesis, half of the participants were asked to add additional information after they wrote their initial law or story. The researchers found that all of the subjects wrote laws with center-embedded clauses, regardless of whether they wrote the law all at once or were told to write a draft and then add to it later. And, when they wrote stories related to those laws, they wrote in much plainer English, regardless of whether they had to add information later.
“When writing laws, they did a lot of center-embedding regardless of whether or not they had to edit it or write it from scratch. And in that narrative text, they did not use center-embedding in either case,” Martinez says.
In another set of experiments, about 80 participants were asked to write laws, as well as descriptions that would explain those laws to visitors from another country. In these experiments, participants again used center-embedding for their laws, but not for the descriptions of those laws.
The origins of legalese
Gibson’s lab is now investigating the origins of center-embedding in legal documents. Early American laws were based on British law, so the researchers plan to analyze British laws to see if they feature the same kind of grammatical construction. And going back much farther, they plan to analyze whether center-embedding is found in the Hammurabi Code, the earliest known set of laws, which dates to around 1750 BC.
“There may be just a stylistic way of writing from back then, and if it was seen as successful, people would use that style in other languages,” Gibson says. “I would guess that it’s an accidental property of how the laws were written the first time, but we don’t know that yet.”
The researchers hope that their work, which has identified specific aspects of legal language that make it more difficult to understand, will motivate lawmakers to try to make laws more comprehensible. Efforts to write legal documents in plainer language date to at least the 1970s, when President Richard Nixon declared that federal regulations should be written in “layman’s terms.” However, legal language has changed very little since that time.
“We have learned only very recently what it is that makes legal language so complicated, and therefore I am optimistic about being able to change it,” Gibson says.
Share this news article on:
Related links.
- Eric Martinez
- Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences
Related Topics
- Communications
- Literature, languages and writing
- Brain and cognitive sciences
Related Articles
![formulate the hypothesis pdf Two multi-colored talk bubbles. The right bubble fills more of the screen than the left.](https://news.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/news_article__archive/public/images/202311/MIT_Color-Language-01-PRESS.jpg?itok=jpr2eFmQ)
How “blue” and “green” appeared in a language that didn’t have words for them
![formulate the hypothesis pdf A magnifying glass on top of a law document; it warps the text. A large wavey “?” icon is in the magnifying glass.](https://news.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/news_article__archive/public/images/202305/MIT-LawyerLegalese-01-press.jpg?itok=PpPiRXj6)
Even lawyers don’t like legalese
![formulate the hypothesis pdf legal document with question mark graphic](https://news.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/news_article__archive/public/images/202203/MIT-Legal-Documents-01-press.jpg?itok=nzHq3jDr)
Objection: No one can understand what you’re saying
Previous item Next item
More MIT News
![formulate the hypothesis pdf Quantum computer](https://news.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/news_article__recent_news/public/images/202408/MIT_Quantum-Factoring-01-PRESS.jpg?itok=5PuuJuLf)
Toward a code-breaking quantum computer
Read full story →
Uphill battles: Across the country in 75 days
![formulate the hypothesis pdf Aneal Krishnan, William Cruz, Alexander Edwards, and David LoBosco pose in front of a desk with a backlit “IQT” logo. Cruz and Edwards wear military cadet uniforms.](https://news.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/news_article__recent_news/public/images/202408/MIT-IQT.jpg?itok=MN0LNYB_)
3 Questions: From the bench to the battlefield
![formulate the hypothesis pdf Duane Boning headshot](https://news.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/news_article__recent_news/public/images/202408/duane-boning-mit-a1_copy.jpg?itok=9Ws8Bc1E)
Duane Boning named vice provost for international activities
![formulate the hypothesis pdf Aerial shot of MIT’s Great Dome and campus](https://news.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/news_article__recent_news/public/images/202408/MIT_Admissions-01-PRESS-level.jpg?itok=wJ0BuuO0)
Q&A: Undergraduate admissions in the wake of the 2023 Supreme Court ruling
![formulate the hypothesis pdf A large glowing stem cell, with clocks and empty plates in background.](https://news.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/news_article__recent_news/public/images/202408/MIT-Fasting-Cancer-01-press.jpg?itok=dkS9veOs)
Study reveals the benefits and downside of fasting
- More news on MIT News homepage →
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, USA
- Map (opens in new window)
- Events (opens in new window)
- People (opens in new window)
- Careers (opens in new window)
- Accessibility
- Social Media Hub
- MIT on Facebook
- MIT on YouTube
- MIT on Instagram
![](http://sektorel.online/777/templates/cheerup/res/banner1.gif)
IMAGES
COMMENTS
hypothesis is a statement that specific relationship you expect to find from your examination of these variables. When formulating the hypothesis(es) for your study, there are a few things you need to keep in mind. Good hypotheses meet the following criteria: 1) Identify the independent and dependent variables to be studied.
The researcher states a hypothesis to be tested, formulates an analysis plan, analyzes sample data. according to the plan, and accepts or rejects the null hypothesis, based on r esults of the ...
Your hypothesis is what you propose to "prove" by your research. As a result of your research, you will arrive at a conclusion, a theory, or understanding that will be useful or applicable beyond the research itself. 3. Avoid judgmental words in your hypothesis. Value judgments are subjective and are not appropriate for a hypothesis.
"A hypothesis is a conjectural statement of the relation between two or more variables". (Kerlinger, 1956) "Hypothesis is a formal statement that presents the expected relationship between an independent and dependent variable."(Creswell, 1994) "A research question is essentially a hypothesis asked in the form of a question."
growth.To begin formulating a hypothesis:1. Review. ll. the information gathered during research 2. Fig. re. out what the main question of the study is3. Form a general statement outlining this question. and the overall expectation of the experimentThe goal is to create a rough version of the statement seen in Exam.
Formulating Research Hypothesis and Objective 4.1 Background Formulating a research hypothesis and objectives is the rst and foremost step in any research process as they provide a clear direction and purpose for your study. In this chapter, we shall learn about formulating an ideal research hypothesis and objectives.
alternative hypothesis H0: p = .5 HA: p <> .5 Reject the null hypothesis if the computed test statistic is less than -1.96 or more than 1.96 P(Z # a) = α, i.e., F(a) = α for a one-tailed alternative that involves a < sign. Note that a is a negative number. H0: p = .5 HA: p < .5 Reject the null hypothesis if the computed test statistic
Formulating Hypotheses After you have reviewed the relevant literature and have a research question, you are prepared to be more specific. You want to make one or more predictions for your study. Such a prediction is called a hypothesis. It is an educated guessregarding what should happen in a particular situation under certain conditions.
A good hypothesis has a substantive link to existing literature and theory. In the above example, let's assume there is literature indicat-ing that reading to children is one way to increase their comprehen-sion. The hypothesis is a test of that idea. 4. A hypothesis should be brief and to the point. You want the research
assumption is true. Likewise, in hypothesis testing, we start by assuming that the hypothesis or claim we are testing is true. This is stated in the null hypothesis. The basis of the decision is to determine whether this assumption is likely to be true. The null hypothesis (H 0), stated as the null, is a statement about a population
Abstract. Formulating a research hypothesis and objectives is the first and foremost step in any research process as they provide a clear direction and purpose for your study. In this chapter, we shall learn about formulating an ideal research hypothesis and objectives. Formulation and development of the hypothesis and objectives take place ...
Hypothesis testing will rely extensively on the idea that, having a pdf, one can compute the probability of all the corresponding events. Make sure you understand this point before going ahead. We have seen that the pdf of a random variable synthesizes all the probabilities of realization of the underlying events.
The quality of hypothesis determines the value of the results obtained from research. The value of hypothesis in research has been aptly stated by Claude Bernard as, "The ideas are the seed; the method is the soil which provides it with the conditions to develop, to prosper and give better fruits following its nature.
PDF | A hypothesis is a statement of the researcher's expectation or prediction about relationship among study variables. ... are going to formulate a hypothesis based . on problem. When we are ...
Formulating Hypotheses for Different Study Designs. Generating a testable working hypothesis is the first step towards conducting original research. Such research may prove or disprove the proposed hypothesis. Case reports, case series, online surveys and other observational studies, clinical trials, and narrative reviews help to generate ...
b. Organise and list all the themes you want to discuss and relate. c. Identify and describe various theories relevant to your field of research. d. Describe the gaps that exist in the body of knowledge in. To do so: a. Start your review with a theme or points that you want. your field.
Planning Phase > Step 4: Formulate a hypothesis Formulate a Hypothesis Worksheet Your Topic: _____ Research/Guiding Question: _____ _____ Purpose statement In one sentence state what the experiment will allow you to discover about your research/guiding question. This is your purpose statement, or the reason for the experiment. ...
5. Phrase your hypothesis in three ways. To identify the variables, you can write a simple prediction in if…then form. The first part of the sentence states the independent variable and the second part states the dependent variable. If a first-year student starts attending more lectures, then their exam scores will improve.
3.4 Hypothesis 3.4.1 Importance of Hypothesis 3.4.2 Characteristics of a Good Hypothesis 3.4.3 Formulation of Hypothesis 3.4.4 Forms of Hypothesis 3.4.5 Hypothesis in Various Types of Research 3.4.5.1 Hypothesis in Experimental Research 3.4.5.2 Hypothesis in Descriptive Research 3.5 Let Us Sum Up 3.6 Check Your Progress: The Key 3.0 INTRODUCTION
p will be higher. This is non directional hypothesis. The null and alternative hypothesis in this case would be stated as follows: Ho : μ1 = μ2, H1 : μ1 ≠ μ2 Thus, the null hypothesis is that mean of group 1 equals the mean of group 2, and the alternative hypothesis is that t. al the mean of group 2.2.4.3 Directio.
There are three major possible difficulties; a researcher could face during formulation of hypothesis. First, the absence of knowledge of a theoretical framework is a major difficulty in formulating a good research hypothesis. Second, if detailed theoretical evidences are not available or if the investigator is not aware of the availability of ...
Abstract. The first and most important step of a rese arch is formulation of research problems. It is like. the foundation of a building to be constructed. To solve a problem someone has to know ...
HYPOTHESIS FORMULATION. Saidna Zulfiqar Bin Tahir. The third step in the research process after formulating problem statement and literature review is to formulate hypotheses. The hypothesis is a tentative solution of a problem. The research activities are planned to verify the hypothesis and not to find out the solution of the problem or to ...
Researchers studying the origins of legalese say lawmakers and lawyers may write laws and legal documents in a convoluted manner to confer a "ritualistic, spell-like element" signaling authority.
In the first task, people were told to write laws prohibiting crimes such as drunk driving, burglary, arson, and drug trafficking. In the second task, they were asked to write stories about those crimes. To test the copy and edit hypothesis, half of the participants were asked to add additional information after they wrote their initial law or ...