directional hypothesis psychology

Directional Hypothesis: Definition and 10 Examples

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]

Learn about our Editorial Process

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) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 10 Reasons you’re Perpetually Single
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 20 Montessori Toddler Bedrooms (Design Inspiration)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 21 Montessori Homeschool Setups
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 101 Hidden Talents Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

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.

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.

psychologyrocks

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

Nothing much! If the study is a true experiment then we can call the hypothesis “an experimental hypothesis”, a prediction is made about how the IV causes an effect on the DV. In a study which does not involve the direct manipulation of an IV, i.e. a natural or quasi-experiment or any other quantitative research method (e.g. survey) has been used, then we call it an “alternative hypothesis”, it is the 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 the 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 Activities

writing-hypotheses-revision-sheet

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

By Psychstix by Mandy wood

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

Hypothesis ( AQA A Level Psychology )

Revision note.

Psychology Content Creator

• A hypothesis is a testable statement written as a prediction of what the researcher expects to find as a result of their experiment
• A hypothesis should be no more than one sentence long
• The hypothesis needs to include the independent variable (IV) and the dependent variable (DV)
• For example - stating that you will measure ‘aggression’ is not enough ('aggression' has not been operationalised)
• by exposing some children to an aggressive adult model whilst other children are not exposed to an aggressive adult model (operationalisation of the IV) 
• number of imitative and non-imitative acts of aggression performed by the child (operationalisation of the DV)

The Experimental Hypothesis

• Children who are exposed to an aggressive adult model will perform more acts of imitative and non-imitative aggression than children who have not been exposed to an aggressive adult model
• The experimental hypothesis can be written as a  directional hypothesis or as a non-directional hypothesis

The Experimental Hypothesis: Directional 

• A directional experimental hypothesis (also known as one-tailed)  predicts the direction of the change/difference (it anticipates more specifically what might happen)
• A directional hypothesis is usually used when there is previous research which support a particular theory or outcome i.e. what a researcher might expect to happen
• Participants who drink 200ml of an energy drink 5 minutes before running 100m will be faster (in seconds) than participants who drink 200ml of water 5 minutes before running 100m
• Participants who learn a poem in a room in which loud music is playing will recall less of the poem's content than participants who learn the same poem in a silent room

 The Experimental Hypothesis: Non-Directional 

• A non-directional experimental hypothesis (also known as two -tailed) does not predict the direction of the change/difference (it is an 'open goal' i.e. anything could happen)
• A non-directional hypothesis is usually used when there is either no or little previous research which support a particular theory or outcome i.e. what the researcher cannot be confident as to what will happen
• There will be a difference in time taken (in seconds) to run 100m depending on whether participants have drunk 200ml of an energy drink or 200ml of water 5 minutes before running 
• There will be a difference in recall of a poem depending on whether participants learn the poem in a room in which loud music is playing or in a silent room

The Null Hypothesis

• All published psychology research must include the null hypothesis
• There will be no difference in children's acts of imitative and non-imitative aggression depending on whether they have observed an aggressive adult model or a non-aggressive adult model
• The null hypothesis has to begin with the idea that the IV will have no effect on the DV  because until the experiment is run and the results are analysed it is impossible to state anything else! 
• To put this in 'laymen's terms: if you bought a lottery ticket you could not predict that you are going to win the jackpot: you have to wait for the results to find out (spoiler alert: the chances of this happening are soooo low that you might as well save your cash!)
• There will be no difference in time taken (in seconds) to run 100m depending on whether participants have drunk 200ml of an energy drink or 200ml of water 5 minutes before running 
• There will be no difference in recall of a poem depending on whether participants learn the poem in a room in which loud music is playing or in a silent room
• (NB this is not quite so slick and easy with a directional hypothesis as this sort of hypothesis will never begin with 'There will be a difference')
• this is why the null hypothesis is so important - it tells the researcher whether or not their experiment has shown a difference in conditions (which is generally what they want to see, otherwise it's back to the drawing board...)

Worked example

Jim wants to test the theory that chocolate helps your ability to solve word-search puzzles

He believes that sugar helps memory as he has read some research on this in a text book

He puts up a poster in his sixth-form common room asking for people to take part after school one day and explains that they will be required to play two memory games, where eating chocolate will be involved

(a)  Should Jim use a directional hypothesis in this study? Explain your answer (2 marks)

(b)  Write a suitable hypothesis for this study. (4 marks)

a) Jim should use a directional hypothesis (1 mark)

    because previous research exists that states what might happen (2 nd mark)

b)  'Participants will remember more items from a shopping list in a memory game within the hour after eating 50g of chocolate, compared to when they have not consumed any chocolate'

• 1 st mark for directional
• 2 nd mark for IV- eating chocolate
• 3 rd mark for DV- number of items remembered
• 4 th mark for operationalising both IV & DV
• If you write a non-directional or null hypothesis the mark is 0
• If you do not get the direction correct the mark is zero
• Remember to operationalise the IV & DV

You've read 0 of your 10 free revision notes

Unlock more, it's free, join the 100,000 + students that ❤️ save my exams.

the (exam) results speak for themselves:

Did this page help you?

• Scientific Processes
• Features of Science
• Statistics: Inferential & Descriptive
• Gender & Culture in Psychology
• Free Will & Determinism
• The Nature-Nurture Debate
• Holism & Reductionism
• Idiographic & Nomothetic Approaches
• Ethical Implications of Research

Author: Claire Neeson

Claire has been teaching for 34 years, in the UK and overseas. She has taught GCSE, A-level and IB Psychology which has been a lot of fun and extremely exhausting! Claire is now a freelance Psychology teacher and content creator, producing textbooks, revision notes and (hopefully) exciting and interactive teaching materials for use in the classroom and for exam prep. Her passion (apart from Psychology of course) is roller skating and when she is not working (or watching 'Coronation Street') she can be found busting some impressive moves on her local roller rink.

Aims And Hypotheses, Directional And Non-Directional

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

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”.

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.

(1)  Directional Hypothesis:  states that the IV will have an effect on the DV and what that effect will be (the direction of results). For example, eating smarties will significantly  improve  an individual’s dancing ability. When writing a directional hypothesis, it is important that you state exactly  how  the IV will influence the DV.

(3)  A Null Hypothesis:  states that the IV will have no significant effect on the DV, for example, ‘eating smarties will have no effect in an individuals dancing ability.’

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

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

• Study Notes

Aims and Hypotheses

Last updated 22 Mar 2021

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

Observations of events or behaviour in our surroundings provoke questions as to why they occur. In turn, one or multiple theories might attempt to explain a phenomenon, and investigations are consequently conducted to test them. One observation could be that athletes tend to perform better when they have a training partner, and a theory might propose that this is because athletes are more motivated with peers around them.

The aim of an investigation, driven by a theory to explain a given observation, states the intent of the study in general terms. Continuing the above example, the consequent aim might be “to investigate the effect of having a training partner on athletes’ motivation levels”.

The theory attempting to explain an observation will help to inform hypotheses - predictions of an investigation’s outcome that make specific reference to the independent variables (IVs) manipulated and dependent variables (DVs) measured by the researchers.

There are two types of hypothesis:

• - H 1 – Research hypothesis
• - H 0 – Null hypothesis

H 1 – The Research Hypothesis

This predicts a statistically significant effect of an IV on a DV (i.e. an experiment), or a significant relationship between variables (i.e. a correlation study), e.g.

• In an experiment: “Athletes who have a training partner are likely to score higher on a questionnaire measuring motivation levels than athletes who train alone.”
• In a correlation study: ‘There will be a significant positive correlation between athletes’ motivation questionnaire scores and the number of partners athletes train with.”

The research hypothesis will be directional (one-tailed) if theory or existing evidence argues a particular ‘direction’ of the predicted results, as demonstrated in the two hypothesis examples above.

Non-directional (two-tailed) research hypotheses do not predict a direction, so here would simply predict “a significant difference” between questionnaire scores in athletes who train alone and with a training partner (in an experiment), or “a significant relationship” between questionnaire scores and number of training partners (in a correlation study).

H 0 – The Null Hypothesis

This predicts that a statistically significant effect or relationship will not be found, e.g.

• In an experiment: “There will be no significant difference in motivation questionnaire scores between athletes who train with and without a training partner.”
• In a correlation study: “There will be no significant relationship between motivation questionnaire scores and the number of partners athletes train with.”

When the investigation concludes, analysis of results will suggest that either the research hypothesis or null hypothesis can be retained, with the other rejected. Ultimately this will either provide evidence to support of refute the theory driving a hypothesis, and may lead to further research in the field.

You might also like

A level psychology topic quiz - research methods.

Quizzes & Activities

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

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.

Directional vs Non-Directional Hypothesis: Key Difference

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

What is a Directional Hypothesis? (Definition & Examples)

Table of Contents

A directional hypothesis is a type of hypothesis that predicts the direction of the relationship between two variables. It states that there will be a specific and expected change in one variable based on the change in the other variable. This type of hypothesis is often used in experiments and research studies to make a clear prediction and guide the direction of the study. For example, “Increasing the amount of exercise will lead to a decrease in cholesterol levels” is a directional hypothesis as it predicts a specific direction of change in cholesterol levels based on the change in exercise. In contrast, a non-directional hypothesis would simply state that there is a relationship between exercise and cholesterol levels without specifying the direction of the relationship. Overall, a directional hypothesis helps researchers to make informed and focused conclusions about the relationship between variables.

A statistical hypothesis is an assumption about a . 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.

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.

Related terms:

• Directional Hypothesis
• What is a directional hypothesis?
• What are five examples of a null hypothesis?
• How to Perform Hypothesis Testing in Python (With Examples)
• How to Write Hypothesis Test Conclusions (With Examples)
• 4 Examples of Hypothesis Testing in Real Life?
• What is the definition of the Central Limit Theorem and can you provide some examples of its application?
• What is the definition of concomitant variable and what are some examples?
• What is the definition of omitted variable bias and what are some examples of it?
• What is Curvilinear Regression? (Definition & Examples)

DIRECTIONAL HYPOTHESIS

Prediction relating to the direction of experimental scores from one group will differ to another group.

Leave a Reply

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

Latest Posts

What Happens At An ADHD Assessment

A Quick Look at the History Behind Hypnosis

A Brief History of Brainwashing: The Science of Thought Control

A Deep Dive into the Social Psychology of Leadership

Counseling Approaches to Client Care: Theories to Apply in Practice

The Future Of Education: Can You Earn A Psychology Degree Online?

Insomnia & Mental Illness: What is the Correlation?

Stop Guessing: Here Are 3 Steps to Data-Driven Psychological Decisions

Getting Help with Grief: Understanding Therapy & How It Can Help

Exploring the Psychology of Risk and Reward

Understanding ADHD in Women: Symptoms, Treatment & Support

Meeting the Milestones: A Guide to Piaget's Child Developmental Stages

Popular psychology terms, medical model, hypermnesia, affirmation, brainwashing, backup reinforcer, message-learning approach, affiliative behavior, assertiveness, acculturation, behavioral congruence, personal adjustment.

Directional Hypothesis Statement

Ai generator.

Grasping the intricacies of a directional hypothesis is a stepping stone in advanced research. It offers a clear perspective, pointing towards a specific prediction. From meticulously crafted examples to a thesis statement writing guide, and invaluable tips – this segment shines a light on the essence of formulating a precise and informed directional hypothesis. Embark on this enlightening journey and amplify the quality and clarity of your research endeavors.

What is a Directional hypothesis?

A directional hypothesis, often referred to as a one-tailed hypothesis , is a specific type of hypothesis that predicts the direction of the expected relationship between variables. This type of hypothesis is used when researchers have enough preliminary evidence or theoretical foundation to predict the direction of the relationship, rather than merely stating that a relationship exists.

For example, based on previous studies or established theories, a researcher might hypothesize that a specific intervention will lead to an increase (or decrease) in a certain outcome, rather than just hypothesizing that the intervention will have some effect without specifying the direction of that effect.

What is an example of a Directional hypothesis Statement?

“Children exposed to interactive educational software will demonstrate a higher increase in mathematical skills compared to children who receive traditional classroom instruction.” In this statement, the direction of the expected relationship is clear – the use of interactive educational software is predicted to have a positive effect on mathematical skills.  You may also be interested in our  non directional .

100 Directional Hypothesis Statement Examples

Size: 244 KB

Directional hypotheses are pivotal in streamlining research focus, providing a clear trajectory by anticipating a specific trend or outcome. They’re an embodiment of informed predictions, crafted based on prior knowledge or insightful observations. Discover below a plethora of examples showcasing the essence of these one-tailed, directional assertions.

• Effect of Diet on Weight: Individuals on a high-fiber diet will lose more weight over a month compared to those on a low-fiber diet.
• Physical Activity and Heart Health: Regular aerobic exercise will lead to a more significant reduction in blood pressure than anaerobic exercise.
• Learning Methods: Students taught via hands-on methods will retain information longer than those taught through lectures.
• Music and Productivity: Employees listening to classical music during work hours will demonstrate higher productivity than those listening to pop music.
• Medication Efficacy: Patients administered Drug X will show faster recovery rates from the flu than those given a placebo.
• Sleep and Memory: Individuals sleeping for 8 hours nightly will have better memory recall than those sleeping only 5 hours.
• Training Intensity and Muscle Growth: Athletes undergoing high-intensity training will exhibit more muscle growth than those in low-intensity programs.
• Organic Foods and Health: Consuming organic foods will lead to lower cholesterol levels compared to consuming non-organic foods.
• Stress and Immunity: Individuals exposed to chronic stress will have a lower immune response than those with minimal stress.
• Digital Learning Platforms: Students utilizing digital learning platforms will score higher in standardized tests than those relying solely on textbooks.
• Caffeine and Alertness: People drinking three cups of coffee daily will show higher alertness levels than non-coffee drinkers.
• Therapy Types: Patients undergoing cognitive-behavioral therapy will show greater reductions in depressive symptoms than those in talk therapy.
• E-Books and Reading Speed: Individuals reading from e-books will process content faster than those reading traditional paper books.
• Urban Living and Mental Health: Residents in urban areas will report higher stress levels than those living in rural regions.
• UV Exposure and Skin Health: Consistent exposure to UV rays will lead to faster skin aging compared to limited sun exposure.
• Yoga and Flexibility: Engaging in daily yoga practices will increase flexibility more significantly than bi-weekly practices.
• Meditation and Stress Reduction: Practicing daily meditation will lead to a more substantial decrease in cortisol levels than sporadic meditation.
• Parenting Styles and Child Independence: Children raised with authoritative parenting styles will demonstrate higher levels of independence than those raised with permissive styles.
• Economic Incentives: Workers receiving performance-based bonuses will exhibit higher job satisfaction than those with fixed salaries.
• Sugar Intake and Energy: Consuming high sugar foods will lead to a more rapid energy decline than low-sugar foods.
• Language Acquisition: Children exposed to bilingual environments before age five will develop superior linguistic skills compared to those exposed later in life.
• Herbal Teas and Sleep: Drinking chamomile tea before bedtime will result in a better sleep quality compared to drinking green tea.
• Posture and Back Pain: Individuals who practice regular posture exercises will experience less chronic back pain than those who don’t.
• Air Quality and Respiratory Issues: Residents in cities with high air pollution will report more respiratory issues than those in cities with cleaner air.
• Online Marketing and Sales: Businesses employing targeted online advertising strategies will see a higher increase in sales than those using traditional advertising methods.
• Pet Ownership and Loneliness: Seniors who own pets will report lower levels of loneliness than those who don’t have pets.
• Dietary Supplements and Immunity: Regular intake of vitamin C supplements will lead to fewer instances of common cold than a placebo.
• Technology and Social Skills: Children who spend over five hours daily on electronic devices will exhibit weaker face-to-face social skills than those who spend less than an hour.
• Remote Work and Productivity: Employees working remotely will report higher job satisfaction than those working in a traditional office setting.
• Organic Farming and Soil Health: Farms employing organic methods will have richer soil nutrient content than those using conventional methods.
• Probiotics and Digestive Health: Consuming probiotics daily will lead to improved gut health compared to not consuming any.
• Art Therapy and Trauma Recovery: Individuals undergoing art therapy will show faster emotional recovery from trauma than those using only talk therapy.
• Video Games and Reflexes: Regular gamers will demonstrate quicker reflex actions than non-gamers.
• Forest Bathing and Stress: Engaging in monthly forest bathing sessions will reduce stress levels more significantly than urban recreational activities.
• Vegan Diet and Heart Health: Individuals following a vegan diet will have a lower risk of heart diseases compared to those on omnivorous diets.
• Mindfulness and Anxiety: Practicing mindfulness meditation will result in a more significant reduction in anxiety levels than general relaxation techniques.
• Solar Energy and Cost Efficiency: Over a decade, households using solar energy will report more cost savings than those relying on traditional electricity sources.
• Active Commuting and Fitness Level: People who cycle or walk to work will have better cardiovascular health than those who commute by car.
• Online Learning and Retention: Students who engage in interactive online learning will retain subject matter better than those using passive video lectures.
• Gardening and Mental Wellbeing: Engaging in regular gardening activities will lead to improved mental well-being compared to non-gardening related hobbies.
• Music Therapy and Memory: Alzheimer’s patients exposed to regular music therapy sessions will display better memory retention than those who aren’t.
• Organic Foods and Allergies: Individuals consuming primarily organic foods will report fewer food allergies compared to those consuming non-organic foods.
• Class Size and Learning Efficiency: Students in smaller class sizes will demonstrate higher academic achievements than those in larger classes.
• Sports and Leadership Skills: Teenagers engaged in team sports will develop stronger leadership skills than those engaged in solitary activities.
• Virtual Reality and Pain Management: Patients using virtual reality as a distraction method during minor surgical procedures will report lower pain levels than those using traditional methods.
• Recycling and Environmental Awareness: Communities with mandatory recycling programs will demonstrate higher environmental awareness than those without such programs.
• Acupuncture and Migraine Relief: Migraine sufferers receiving regular acupuncture treatments will experience fewer episodes than those relying only on medication.
• Urban Green Spaces and Mental Health: Residents in cities with ample green spaces will show lower rates of depression compared to cities predominantly built-up.
• Aquatic Exercises and Joint Health: Individuals with arthritis participating in aquatic exercises will report greater joint mobility than those who do land-based exercises.
• E-books and Reading Comprehension: Students using e-books for study will demonstrate similar reading comprehension levels as those using traditional textbooks.
• Financial Literacy Programs and Debt Management: Adults who attended financial literacy programs in school will manage their debts more effectively than those who didn’t.
• Play-based Learning and Creativity: Children educated through play-based learning methods will exhibit higher creativity levels than those in a strictly academic environment.
• Caffeine Consumption and Cognitive Function: Moderate daily caffeine consumption will lead to improved cognitive function compared to high or no caffeine intake.
• Vegetable Intake and Skin Health: Individuals consuming a diet rich in colorful vegetables will have healthier skin compared to those with minimal vegetable intake.
• Physical Activity and Bone Density: Post-menopausal women engaging in weight-bearing exercises will maintain better bone density than those who don’t.
• Intermittent Fasting and Metabolism: Individuals practicing intermittent fasting will demonstrate a more efficient metabolism rate than those on regular diets.
• Public Transport and Air Quality: Cities with extensive public transport systems will have better air quality than cities primarily reliant on individual car use.
• Sleep Duration and Immunity: Adults sleeping between 7-9 hours nightly will have stronger immune responses than those sleeping less or more than this range.
• Hands-on Learning and Skill Retention: Students taught through hands-on practical methods will retain technical skills better than those taught purely theoretically.
• Nature Exposure and Concentration: Regular breaks involving nature exposure during work will result in higher concentration levels than indoor breaks.
• Yoga and Stress Reduction: Individuals practicing daily yoga sessions will experience a more significant reduction in stress levels compared to non-practitioners.
• Pet Ownership and Loneliness: People who own pets, especially dogs or cats, will report lower feelings of loneliness than those without pets.
• Bilingualism and Cognitive Flexibility: Individuals who are bilingual will exhibit higher cognitive flexibility compared to those who speak only one language.
• Green Tea and Weight Loss: Regular consumption of green tea will result in a higher rate of weight loss than those who consume other beverages.
• Plant-based Diets and Heart Health: Individuals following a plant-based diet will show a reduced risk of cardiovascular diseases compared to those on omnivorous diets.
• Forest Bathing and Mental Wellbeing: People who frequently engage in forest bathing or nature walks will demonstrate improved mental wellbeing than those who don’t.
• Online Learning and Independence: Students who predominantly learn through online platforms will develop stronger independent study habits than those in traditional classroom settings.
• Gardening and Life Satisfaction: Individuals engaged in regular gardening will report higher life satisfaction scores than non-gardeners.
• Video Games and Reflexes: People who play action video games frequently will exhibit quicker reflexes than non-gamers.
• Daily Meditation and Anxiety Levels: Individuals who practice daily meditation sessions will experience reduced anxiety levels compared to those who don’t meditate.
• Volunteering and Self-esteem: Regular volunteers will have higher self-esteem and a more positive outlook than those who don’t volunteer.
• Art Therapy and Emotional Expression: Individuals undergoing art therapy will exhibit a broader range of emotional expression than those undergoing traditional counseling.
• Morning Sunlight and Sleep Patterns: Exposure to morning sunlight will result in better nighttime sleep quality than exposure to late afternoon sunlight.
• Probiotics and Digestive Health: Regular intake of probiotics will lead to improved gut health and fewer digestive issues than those not consuming probiotics.
• Digital Detox and Social Skills: Individuals who frequently engage in digital detoxes will develop better face-to-face social skills than constant device users.
• Physical Libraries and Reading Habits: Students with access to physical libraries will exhibit more consistent reading habits than those relying solely on digital sources.
• Public Speaking Training and Confidence: Individuals who undergo public speaking training will express higher confidence levels in various social scenarios than those who don’t.
• Music Lessons and Mathematical Abilities: Children who take music lessons, especially in instruments like the piano, will show improved mathematical abilities compared to non-musical peers.
• Dance and Coordination: Engaging in dance classes will lead to better physical coordination and balance than other forms of exercise.
• Home Cooking and Nutritional Intake: Individuals who predominantly consume home-cooked meals will have a more balanced nutritional intake than those relying on take-out or restaurant meals.
• Organic Foods and Health Outcomes: Individuals consuming predominantly organic foods will exhibit fewer health issues related to preservatives and pesticides than those consuming conventionally grown foods.
• Podcast Consumption and Listening Skills: People who regularly listen to podcasts will demonstrate better active listening skills compared to those who rarely or never listen to podcasts.
• Urban Farming and Community Engagement: Urban areas with community farming initiatives will experience higher levels of community engagement and social interaction than areas without such initiatives.
• Mindfulness Practices and Emotional Regulation: Individuals practicing mindfulness techniques, like deep breathing or body scans, will manage their emotional responses better than those not practicing mindfulness.
• E-books and Reading Speed: People who primarily read e-books will exhibit a faster reading speed compared to those reading printed books.
• Aerobic Exercises and Endurance: Engaging in regular aerobic exercises will lead to higher endurance levels compared to anaerobic exercises.
• Digital Note-taking and Information Retention: Students who use digital platforms for note-taking will retain and recall information less effectively than those taking handwritten notes.
• Cycling to Work and Cardiovascular Health: Individuals who cycle to work will have better cardiovascular health than those who commute using motorized transportation.
• Active Learning Techniques and Academic Performance: Students exposed to active learning strategies will perform better academically than students in traditional lecture-based settings.
• Ergonomic Workspaces and Physical Discomfort: Workers who use ergonomic office furniture will report fewer musculoskeletal problems than those using conventional office furniture.
• Reforestation Initiatives and Air Quality: Areas with proactive reforestation initiatives will have significantly better air quality than areas without such efforts.
• Mediterranean Diet and Lifespan: People following a Mediterranean diet will generally have a longer lifespan compared to those following Western diets.
• Virtual Reality Training and Skill Acquisition: Individuals trained using virtual reality platforms will acquire new skills more rapidly than those trained using traditional methods.
• Solar Energy Adoption and Electricity Bills: Households that adopt solar energy solutions will experience lower monthly electricity bills than those relying solely on grid electricity.
• Journaling and Stress Reduction: Regular journaling will lead to a more significant reduction in perceived stress levels than non-journaling practices.
• Noise-cancelling Headphones and Productivity: Workers using noise-cancelling headphones in open office environments will show higher productivity levels than those not using such headphones.
• Early Birds and Task Efficiency: Individuals who start their day early, or “early birds”, will generally be more efficient in completing tasks than night owls.
• Coding Bootcamps and Job Placement: Graduates from coding bootcamps will find job placements more rapidly than those with only traditional computer science degrees.
• Plant-based Milks and Lactose Intolerance: Consuming plant-based milks, such as almond or oat milk, will cause fewer digestive problems for lactose-intolerant individuals than cow’s milk.
• Sensory Deprivation Tanks and Creativity: Regular sessions in sensory deprivation tanks will lead to heightened creativity levels compared to traditional relaxation methods.

Directional Hypothesis Statement Examples for Psychology

In the realm of psychology, directional psychology hypothesis are valuable as they specifically predict the nature and direction of a relationship or effect. These statements make pointed predictions about expected outcomes in psychological studies, paving the way for focused investigations.

• Emotion Regulation Techniques: Individuals trained in emotion regulation techniques will exhibit lower levels of anxiety than those untrained.
• Positive Reinforcement in Learning: Children exposed to positive reinforcement will exhibit faster learning rates than those exposed to negative reinforcement.
• Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Depression: Patients undergoing cognitive-behavioral therapy will show more significant improvements in depressive symptoms than those using other therapeutic methods.
• Social Media Use and Self-esteem: Adolescents with higher social media usage will report lower self-esteem than their less active counterparts.
• Mindfulness Meditation and Attention Span: Regular practitioners of mindfulness meditation will have longer attention spans than non-practitioners.
• Childhood Trauma and Adult Relationships: Individuals who experienced trauma in childhood will display more attachment issues in adult romantic relationships than those without such experiences.
• Group Therapy and Social Skills: Individuals attending group therapy will demonstrate improved social skills compared to those receiving individual therapy.
• Extrinsic Motivation and Task Performance: Students driven by extrinsic motivation will have lower task persistence than those driven by intrinsic motivation.
• Visual Imagery and Memory Retention: Participants using visual imagery techniques will recall lists of items more effectively than those using rote memorization.
• Parenting Styles and Adolescent Rebellion: Adolescents raised with authoritarian parenting styles will show higher levels of rebellion than those raised with permissive styles.

Directional Hypothesis Statement Examples for Research

In research, a directional research hypothesis narrows down the prediction to a specific direction of the effect. These hypotheses can serve various fields, guiding researchers toward certain anticipated outcomes, making the study’s goal clearer.

• Online Learning Platforms and Student Engagement: Students using interactive online learning platforms will have higher engagement levels than those using traditional online formats.
• Work from Home and Employee Productivity: Employees working from home will report higher job satisfaction but slightly reduced productivity compared to office-going employees.
• Green Spaces and Urban Well-being: Urban areas with more green spaces will have residents reporting higher well-being scores than areas dominated by concrete.
• Dietary Fiber Intake and Digestive Health: Individuals consuming diets rich in fiber will have fewer digestive issues than those on low-fiber diets.
• Public Transportation and Air Quality: Cities that invest more in public transportation will experience better air quality than cities reliant on individual car usage.
• Gamification and Learning Outcomes: Educational modules that incorporate gamification will yield better learning outcomes than traditional modules.
• Open Source Software and System Security: Systems using open-source software will encounter fewer security breaches than those using proprietary software.
• Organic Farming and Soil Health: Farmlands practicing organic farming methods will have richer soil quality than conventionally farmed lands.
• Renewable Energy Sources and Power Grid Stability: Power grids utilizing a higher percentage of renewable energy sources will experience fewer outages than those predominantly using fossil fuels.
• Artificial Sweeteners and Weight Gain: Regular consumers of artificial sweeteners will not necessarily exhibit lower weight gain compared to consumers of natural sugars.

Directional Hypothesis Statement Examples for Correlation Study

Correlation studies evaluate the relationship between two or more variables. Directional hypotheses in correlation studies anticipate a specific type of association – either positive, negative, or neutral.

• Physical Activity and Mental Health: There will be a positive correlation between regular physical activity levels and self-reported mental well-being.
• Sedentary Lifestyle and Cardiovascular Issues: An increased sedentary lifestyle duration will correlate positively with cardiovascular health issues.
• Reading Habits and Vocabulary Size: There will be a positive correlation between the frequency of reading and the breadth of an individual’s vocabulary.
• Fast Food Consumption and Health Risks: A higher frequency of fast food consumption will correlate with increased health risks, such as obesity or high blood pressure.
• Financial Literacy and Debt Management: Individuals with higher financial literacy will have a negative correlation with unmanaged debts.
• Sleep Duration and Cognitive Performance: There will be a positive correlation between the optimal sleep duration (7-9 hours) and cognitive performance in adults.
• Volunteering and Life Satisfaction: Individuals who volunteer regularly will show a positive correlation with overall life satisfaction scores.
• Alcohol Consumption and Reaction Time: A higher frequency and quantity of alcohol consumption will negatively correlate with reaction times in motor tasks.
• Class Attendance and Academic Grades: There will be a positive correlation between the number of classes attended and the final academic grades of students.
• Eco-friendly Practices and Brand Loyalty: Brands adopting more eco-friendly practices will experience a positive correlation with consumer loyalty and trust.

Directional Hypothesis vs Non-Directional Hypothesis

Directional Hypothesis: A directional hypothesis , as the name implies, provides a specific direction for the expected relationship or difference between variables. It predicts which group will have higher or lower scores or how two variables will relate specifically, such as predicting that one variable will increase as the other decreases.

Advantages of a Directional Hypothesis:

• Offers clarity in predictions.
• Simplifies data interpretation, since the expected outcome is clearly stated.
• Can be based on previous research or established theories, lending more weight to its predictions.

Example of Directional Hypothesis: “Students who receive mindfulness training will have lower stress levels than those who do not receive such training.”

Non-Directional Hypothesis (Two-tailed Hypothesis): A non-directional hypothesis , on the other hand, merely states that there will be a difference between the two groups or a relationship between two variables without specifying the nature of this difference or relationship.

Advantages of a Non-Directional Hypothesis:

• Useful when research is exploratory in nature.
• Provides a broader scope for exploring unexpected results.
• Less bias as it doesn’t anticipate a specific outcome.

Example of Non-Directional Hypothesis: “Students who receive mindfulness training will have different stress levels than those who do not receive such training.”

How do you write a Directional Hypothesis Statement? – Step by Step Guide

1. Identify Your Variables: Before drafting a hypothesis, understand the dependent and independent variables in your study.

2. Review Previous Research: Consider findings from past studies or established theories to make informed predictions.

3. Be Specific: Clearly state which group or condition you expect to have higher or lower scores or how the variables will relate.

4. Keep It Simple: Ensure that the hypothesis is concise and free of jargon.

5. Make It Testable: Your hypothesis should be framed in such a way that it can be empirically tested through experiments or observations.

6. Revise and Refine: After drafting your hypothesis, review it to ensure clarity and relevance. Get feedback if possible.

7. State Confidently: Use definitive language, such as “will” rather than “might.”

Example of Writing Directional Hypothesis: Based on a study that indicates mindfulness reduces stress, and intending to research its impact on students, you might draft: “Students undergoing mindfulness practices will report lower stress levels.”

Tips for Writing a Directional Hypothesis Statement

1. Base Your Predictions on Evidence: Whenever possible, root your hypotheses in existing literature or preliminary observations.

2. Avoid Ambiguity: Be clear about the specific groups or conditions you are comparing.

3. Stay Focused: A hypothesis should address one primary question or relationship. If you find your hypothesis complicated, consider breaking it into multiple hypotheses.

4. Use Simple Language: Complex wording can muddle the clarity of your hypothesis. Ensure it’s understandable, even to those outside your field.

5. Review and Refine: After drafting, set it aside, then revisit with fresh eyes. It can also be helpful to get peers or mentors to review your hypothesis.

6. Avoid Personal Bias: Ensure your hypothesis is based on empirical evidence or theories and not personal beliefs or biases.

Remember, a directional hypothesis is just a starting point. While it provides a roadmap for your research, it’s essential to remain open to whatever results your study yields, even if they contradict your initial predictions.

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting