hypothesis and rationale example

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

How to Write a Great Hypothesis

Hypothesis Definition, Format, Examples, and Tips

Verywell / Alex Dos Diaz

• The Scientific Method

Hypothesis Format

Falsifiability of a hypothesis.

• Operationalization

Hypothesis Types

Hypotheses examples.

• Collecting Data

A hypothesis is a tentative statement about the relationship between two or more variables. It is a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in a study. It is a preliminary answer to your question that helps guide the research process.

Consider a study designed to examine the relationship between sleep deprivation and test performance. The hypothesis might be: "This study is designed to assess the hypothesis that sleep-deprived people will perform worse on a test than individuals who are not sleep-deprived."

At a Glance

A hypothesis is crucial to scientific research because it offers a clear direction for what the researchers are looking to find. This allows them to design experiments to test their predictions and add to our scientific knowledge about the world. This article explores how a hypothesis is used in psychology research, how to write a good hypothesis, and the different types of hypotheses you might use.

The Hypothesis in the Scientific Method

In the scientific method , whether it involves research in psychology, biology, or some other area, a hypothesis represents what the researchers think will happen in an experiment. The scientific method involves the following steps:

• Forming a question
• Performing background research
• Creating a hypothesis
• Designing an experiment
• Collecting data
• Analyzing the results
• Drawing conclusions
• Communicating the results

The hypothesis is a prediction, but it involves more than a guess. Most of the time, the hypothesis begins with a question which is then explored through background research. At this point, researchers then begin to develop a testable hypothesis.

Unless you are creating an exploratory study, your hypothesis should always explain what you  expect  to happen.

In a study exploring the effects of a particular drug, the hypothesis might be that researchers expect the drug to have some type of effect on the symptoms of a specific illness. In psychology, the hypothesis might focus on how a certain aspect of the environment might influence a particular behavior.

Remember, a hypothesis does not have to be correct. While the hypothesis predicts what the researchers expect to see, the goal of the research is to determine whether this guess is right or wrong. When conducting an experiment, researchers might explore numerous factors to determine which ones might contribute to the ultimate outcome.

In many cases, researchers may find that the results of an experiment  do not  support the original hypothesis. When writing up these results, the researchers might suggest other options that should be explored in future studies.

In many cases, researchers might draw a hypothesis from a specific theory or build on previous research. For example, prior research has shown that stress can impact the immune system. So a researcher might hypothesize: "People with high-stress levels will be more likely to contract a common cold after being exposed to the virus than people who have low-stress levels."

In other instances, researchers might look at commonly held beliefs or folk wisdom. "Birds of a feather flock together" is one example of folk adage that a psychologist might try to investigate. The researcher might pose a specific hypothesis that "People tend to select romantic partners who are similar to them in interests and educational level."

Elements of a Good Hypothesis

So how do you write a good hypothesis? When trying to come up with a hypothesis for your research or experiments, ask yourself the following questions:

• Is your hypothesis based on your research on a topic?
• Can your hypothesis be tested?
• Does your hypothesis include independent and dependent variables?

Before you come up with a specific hypothesis, spend some time doing background research. Once you have completed a literature review, start thinking about potential questions you still have. Pay attention to the discussion section in the  journal articles you read . Many authors will suggest questions that still need to be explored.

How to Formulate a Good Hypothesis

To form a hypothesis, you should take these steps:

• Collect as many observations about a topic or problem as you can.
• Evaluate these observations and look for possible causes of the problem.
• Create a list of possible explanations that you might want to explore.
• After you have developed some possible hypotheses, think of ways that you could confirm or disprove each hypothesis through experimentation. This is known as falsifiability.

In the scientific method ,  falsifiability is an important part of any valid hypothesis. In order to test a claim scientifically, it must be possible that the claim could be proven false.

Students sometimes confuse the idea of falsifiability with the idea that it means that something is false, which is not the case. What falsifiability means is that  if  something was false, then it is possible to demonstrate that it is false.

One of the hallmarks of pseudoscience is that it makes claims that cannot be refuted or proven false.

The Importance of Operational Definitions

A variable is a factor or element that can be changed and manipulated in ways that are observable and measurable. However, the researcher must also define how the variable will be manipulated and measured in the study.

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

For example, a researcher might operationally define the variable " test anxiety " as the results of a self-report measure of anxiety experienced during an exam. A "study habits" variable might be defined by the amount of studying that actually occurs as measured by time.

These precise descriptions are important because many things can be measured in various ways. Clearly defining these variables and how they are measured helps ensure that other researchers can replicate your results.

Replicability

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

Replication means repeating an experiment in the same way to produce the same results. By clearly detailing the specifics of how the variables were measured and manipulated, other researchers can better understand the results and repeat the study if needed.

Some variables are more difficult than others to define. For example, how would you operationally define a variable such as aggression ? For obvious ethical reasons, researchers cannot create a situation in which a person behaves aggressively toward others.

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

Hypothesis Checklist

• Does your hypothesis focus on something that you can actually test?
• Does your hypothesis include both an independent and dependent variable?
• Can you manipulate the variables?
• Can your hypothesis be tested without violating ethical standards?

The hypothesis you use will depend on what you are investigating and hoping to find. Some of the main types of hypotheses that you might use include:

• Simple hypothesis : This type of hypothesis suggests there is a relationship between one independent variable and one dependent variable.
• Complex hypothesis : This type suggests a relationship between three or more variables, such as two independent and dependent variables.
• Null hypothesis : This hypothesis suggests no relationship exists between two or more variables.
• Alternative hypothesis : This hypothesis states the opposite of the null hypothesis.
• Statistical hypothesis : This hypothesis uses statistical analysis to evaluate a representative population sample and then generalizes the findings to the larger group.
• Logical hypothesis : This hypothesis assumes a relationship between variables without collecting data or evidence.

A hypothesis often follows a basic format of "If {this happens} then {this will happen}." One way to structure your hypothesis is to describe what will happen to the  dependent variable  if you change the  independent variable .

The basic format might be: "If {these changes are made to a certain independent variable}, then we will observe {a change in a specific dependent variable}."

A few examples of simple hypotheses:

• "Students who eat breakfast will perform better on a math exam than students who do not eat breakfast."
• "Students who experience test anxiety before an English exam will get lower scores than students who do not experience test anxiety."​
• "Motorists who talk on the phone while driving will be more likely to make errors on a driving course than those who do not talk on the phone."
• "Children who receive a new reading intervention will have higher reading scores than students who do not receive the intervention."

Examples of a complex hypothesis include:

• "People with high-sugar diets and sedentary activity levels are more likely to develop depression."
• "Younger people who are regularly exposed to green, outdoor areas have better subjective well-being than older adults who have limited exposure to green spaces."

Examples of a null hypothesis include:

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

Examples of an alternative hypothesis:

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

Collecting Data on Your Hypothesis

Once a researcher has formed a testable hypothesis, the next step is to select a research design and start collecting data. The research method depends largely on exactly what they are studying. There are two basic types of research methods: descriptive research and experimental research.

Descriptive Research Methods

Descriptive research such as  case studies ,  naturalistic observations , and surveys are often used when  conducting an experiment is difficult or impossible. These methods are best used to describe different aspects of a behavior or psychological phenomenon.

Once a researcher has collected data using descriptive methods, a  correlational study  can examine how the variables are related. This research method might be used to investigate a hypothesis that is difficult to test experimentally.

Experimental Research Methods

Experimental methods  are used to demonstrate causal relationships between variables. In an experiment, the researcher systematically manipulates a variable of interest (known as the independent variable) and measures the effect on another variable (known as the dependent variable).

Unlike correlational studies, which can only be used to determine if there is a relationship between two variables, experimental methods can be used to determine the actual nature of the relationship—whether changes in one variable actually  cause  another to change.

The hypothesis is a critical part of any scientific exploration. It represents what researchers expect to find in a study or experiment. In situations where the hypothesis is unsupported by the research, the research still has value. Such research helps us better understand how different aspects of the natural world relate to one another. It also helps us develop new hypotheses that can then be tested in the future.

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

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

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

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

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

Nevid J. Psychology: Concepts and Applications. Wadworth, 2013.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Guide & Examples

How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Guide & Examples

Published on 6 May 2022 by Shona McCombes .

A hypothesis is a statement that can be tested by scientific research. If you want to test a relationship between two or more variables, you need to write hypotheses before you start your experiment or data collection.

Table of contents

What is a hypothesis, developing a hypothesis (with example), hypothesis examples, frequently asked questions about writing hypotheses.

A hypothesis states your predictions about what your research will find. It is a tentative answer to your research question that has not yet been tested. For some research projects, you might have to write several hypotheses that address different aspects of your research question.

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

Variables in hypotheses

Hypotheses propose a relationship between two or more variables . An independent variable is something the researcher changes or controls. A dependent variable is something the researcher observes and measures.

In this example, the independent variable is exposure to the sun – the assumed cause . The dependent variable is the level of happiness – the assumed effect .

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Step 1: ask a question.

Writing a hypothesis begins with a research question that you want to answer. The question should be focused, specific, and researchable within the constraints of your project.

Step 2: Do some preliminary research

Your initial answer to the question should be based on what is already known about the topic. Look for theories and previous studies to help you form educated assumptions about what your research will find.

At this stage, you might construct a conceptual framework to identify which variables you will study and what you think the relationships are between them. Sometimes, you’ll have to operationalise more complex constructs.

Step 3: Formulate your hypothesis

Now you should have some idea of what you expect to find. Write your initial answer to the question in a clear, concise sentence.

Step 4: Refine your hypothesis

You need to make sure your hypothesis is specific and testable. There are various ways of phrasing a hypothesis, but all the terms you use should have clear definitions, and the hypothesis should contain:

• The relevant variables
• The specific group being studied
• The predicted outcome of the experiment or analysis

Step 5: Phrase your hypothesis in three ways

To identify the variables, you can write a simple prediction in if … then form. The first part of the sentence states the independent variable and the second part states the dependent variable.

In academic research, hypotheses are more commonly phrased in terms of correlations or effects, where you directly state the predicted relationship between variables.

If you are comparing two groups, the hypothesis can state what difference you expect to find between them.

Step 6. Write a null hypothesis

If your research involves statistical hypothesis testing , you will also have to write a null hypothesis. The null hypothesis is the default position that there is no association between the variables. The null hypothesis is written as H 0 , while the alternative hypothesis is H 1 or H a .

Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world using statistics. It is used by scientists to test specific predictions, called hypotheses , by calculating how likely it is that a pattern or relationship between variables could have arisen by chance.

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

A research hypothesis is your proposed answer to your research question. The research hypothesis usually includes an explanation (‘ x affects y because …’).

A statistical hypothesis, on the other hand, is a mathematical statement about a population parameter. Statistical hypotheses always come in pairs: the null and alternative hypotheses. In a well-designed study , the statistical hypotheses correspond logically to the research hypothesis.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, May 06). How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 29 August 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/hypothesis-writing/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, operationalisation | a guide with examples, pros & cons, what is a conceptual framework | tips & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples.

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

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

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

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

Table of Contents

What is a hypothesis ?  

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

What is a research hypothesis ?  

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

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

Characteristics of a good hypothesis  

Here are the characteristics of a good hypothesis :  

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

How to create an effective research hypothesis  

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

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

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

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

How to write a research hypothesis  

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

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

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

Population: athletes  

Independent variable: daily cold water showers  

Dependent variable: endurance  

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

Research hypothesis checklist  

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

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

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

Types of research hypothesis  

Different types of research hypothesis are used in scientific research:  

1. Null hypothesis:

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

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

2. Alternative hypothesis:

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

Example: “ The newly identified virus is zoonotic .”  

3. Directional hypothesis :

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

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

4. Non-directional hypothesis:

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

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

5. Simple hypothesis :

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

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

6 . Complex hypothesis :

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

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

7. Associative hypothesis:  

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

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

8 . Causal hypothesis:

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

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

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

Research hypothesis examples  

Here are some good research hypothesis examples :  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Importance of testable hypothesis  

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

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

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on research hypothesis  

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

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

2. When to reject null hypothesis ?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

9. Can research hypotheses be used in qualitative research?

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

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

Based on 22+ years of experience in academia, Editage All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $14 a month !    

Related Posts

Back to School – Lock-in All Access Pack for a Year at the Best Price

Journal Turnaround Time: Researcher.Life and Scholarly Intelligence Join Hands to Empower Researchers with Publication Time Insights 

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

The Craft of Writing a Strong Hypothesis

Table of Contents

Writing a hypothesis is one of the essential elements of a scientific research paper. It needs to be to the point, clearly communicating what your research is trying to accomplish. A blurry, drawn-out, or complexly-structured hypothesis can confuse your readers. Or worse, the editor and peer reviewers.

A captivating hypothesis is not too intricate. This blog will take you through the process so that, by the end of it, you have a better idea of how to convey your research paper's intent in just one sentence.

What is a Hypothesis?

The first step in your scientific endeavor, a hypothesis, is a strong, concise statement that forms the basis of your research. It is not the same as a thesis statement , which is a brief summary of your research paper .

The sole purpose of a hypothesis is to predict your paper's findings, data, and conclusion. It comes from a place of curiosity and intuition . When you write a hypothesis, you're essentially making an educated guess based on scientific prejudices and evidence, which is further proven or disproven through the scientific method.

The reason for undertaking research is to observe a specific phenomenon. A hypothesis, therefore, lays out what the said phenomenon is. And it does so through two variables, an independent and dependent variable.

The independent variable is the cause behind the observation, while the dependent variable is the effect of the cause. A good example of this is “mixing red and blue forms purple.” In this hypothesis, mixing red and blue is the independent variable as you're combining the two colors at your own will. The formation of purple is the dependent variable as, in this case, it is conditional to the independent variable.

Different Types of Hypotheses‌

Types of hypotheses

Some would stand by the notion that there are only two types of hypotheses: a Null hypothesis and an Alternative hypothesis. While that may have some truth to it, it would be better to fully distinguish the most common forms as these terms come up so often, which might leave you out of context.

Apart from Null and Alternative, there are Complex, Simple, Directional, Non-Directional, Statistical, and Associative and casual hypotheses. They don't necessarily have to be exclusive, as one hypothesis can tick many boxes, but knowing the distinctions between them will make it easier for you to construct your own.

1. Null hypothesis

A null hypothesis proposes no relationship between two variables. Denoted by H 0 , it is a negative statement like “Attending physiotherapy sessions does not affect athletes' on-field performance.” Here, the author claims physiotherapy sessions have no effect on on-field performances. Even if there is, it's only a coincidence.

2. Alternative hypothesis

Considered to be the opposite of a null hypothesis, an alternative hypothesis is donated as H1 or Ha. It explicitly states that the dependent variable affects the independent variable. A good  alternative hypothesis example is “Attending physiotherapy sessions improves athletes' on-field performance.” or “Water evaporates at 100 °C. ” The alternative hypothesis further branches into directional and non-directional.

• Directional hypothesis: A hypothesis that states the result would be either positive or negative is called directional hypothesis. It accompanies H1 with either the ‘<' or ‘>' sign.
• Non-directional hypothesis: A non-directional hypothesis only claims an effect on the dependent variable. It does not clarify whether the result would be positive or negative. The sign for a non-directional hypothesis is ‘≠.'

3. Simple hypothesis

A simple hypothesis is a statement made to reflect the relation between exactly two variables. One independent and one dependent. Consider the example, “Smoking is a prominent cause of lung cancer." The dependent variable, lung cancer, is dependent on the independent variable, smoking.

4. Complex hypothesis

In contrast to a simple hypothesis, a complex hypothesis implies the relationship between multiple independent and dependent variables. For instance, “Individuals who eat more fruits tend to have higher immunity, lesser cholesterol, and high metabolism.” The independent variable is eating more fruits, while the dependent variables are higher immunity, lesser cholesterol, and high metabolism.

5. Associative and casual hypothesis

Associative and casual hypotheses don't exhibit how many variables there will be. They define the relationship between the variables. In an associative hypothesis, changing any one variable, dependent or independent, affects others. In a casual hypothesis, the independent variable directly affects the dependent.

6. Empirical hypothesis

Also referred to as the working hypothesis, an empirical hypothesis claims a theory's validation via experiments and observation. This way, the statement appears justifiable and different from a wild guess.

Say, the hypothesis is “Women who take iron tablets face a lesser risk of anemia than those who take vitamin B12.” This is an example of an empirical hypothesis where the researcher  the statement after assessing a group of women who take iron tablets and charting the findings.

7. Statistical hypothesis

The point of a statistical hypothesis is to test an already existing hypothesis by studying a population sample. Hypothesis like “44% of the Indian population belong in the age group of 22-27.” leverage evidence to prove or disprove a particular statement.

Characteristics of a Good Hypothesis

Writing a hypothesis is essential as it can make or break your research for you. That includes your chances of getting published in a journal. So when you're designing one, keep an eye out for these pointers:

• A research hypothesis has to be simple yet clear to look justifiable enough.
• It has to be testable — your research would be rendered pointless if too far-fetched into reality or limited by technology.
• It has to be precise about the results —what you are trying to do and achieve through it should come out in your hypothesis.
• A research hypothesis should be self-explanatory, leaving no doubt in the reader's mind.
• If you are developing a relational hypothesis, you need to include the variables and establish an appropriate relationship among them.
• A hypothesis must keep and reflect the scope for further investigations and experiments.

Separating a Hypothesis from a Prediction

Outside of academia, hypothesis and prediction are often used interchangeably. In research writing, this is not only confusing but also incorrect. And although a hypothesis and prediction are guesses at their core, there are many differences between them.

A hypothesis is an educated guess or even a testable prediction validated through research. It aims to analyze the gathered evidence and facts to define a relationship between variables and put forth a logical explanation behind the nature of events.

Predictions are assumptions or expected outcomes made without any backing evidence. They are more fictionally inclined regardless of where they originate from.

For this reason, a hypothesis holds much more weight than a prediction. It sticks to the scientific method rather than pure guesswork. "Planets revolve around the Sun." is an example of a hypothesis as it is previous knowledge and observed trends. Additionally, we can test it through the scientific method.

Whereas "COVID-19 will be eradicated by 2030." is a prediction. Even though it results from past trends, we can't prove or disprove it. So, the only way this gets validated is to wait and watch if COVID-19 cases end by 2030.

Finally, How to Write a Hypothesis

Quick tips on writing a hypothesis

1.  Be clear about your research question

A hypothesis should instantly address the research question or the problem statement. To do so, you need to ask a question. Understand the constraints of your undertaken research topic and then formulate a simple and topic-centric problem. Only after that can you develop a hypothesis and further test for evidence.

2. Carry out a recce

Once you have your research's foundation laid out, it would be best to conduct preliminary research. Go through previous theories, academic papers, data, and experiments before you start curating your research hypothesis. It will give you an idea of your hypothesis's viability or originality.

Making use of references from relevant research papers helps draft a good research hypothesis. SciSpace Discover offers a repository of over 270 million research papers to browse through and gain a deeper understanding of related studies on a particular topic. Additionally, you can use SciSpace Copilot , your AI research assistant, for reading any lengthy research paper and getting a more summarized context of it. A hypothesis can be formed after evaluating many such summarized research papers. Copilot also offers explanations for theories and equations, explains paper in simplified version, allows you to highlight any text in the paper or clip math equations and tables and provides a deeper, clear understanding of what is being said. This can improve the hypothesis by helping you identify potential research gaps.

3. Create a 3-dimensional hypothesis

Variables are an essential part of any reasonable hypothesis. So, identify your independent and dependent variable(s) and form a correlation between them. The ideal way to do this is to write the hypothetical assumption in the ‘if-then' form. If you use this form, make sure that you state the predefined relationship between the variables.

In another way, you can choose to present your hypothesis as a comparison between two variables. Here, you must specify the difference you expect to observe in the results.

4. Write the first draft

Now that everything is in place, it's time to write your hypothesis. For starters, create the first draft. In this version, write what you expect to find from your research.

Clearly separate your independent and dependent variables and the link between them. Don't fixate on syntax at this stage. The goal is to ensure your hypothesis addresses the issue.

5. Proof your hypothesis

After preparing the first draft of your hypothesis, you need to inspect it thoroughly. It should tick all the boxes, like being concise, straightforward, relevant, and accurate. Your final hypothesis has to be well-structured as well.

Research projects are an exciting and crucial part of being a scholar. And once you have your research question, you need a great hypothesis to begin conducting research. Thus, knowing how to write a hypothesis is very important.

Now that you have a firmer grasp on what a good hypothesis constitutes, the different kinds there are, and what process to follow, you will find it much easier to write your hypothesis, which ultimately helps your research.

Now it's easier than ever to streamline your research workflow with SciSpace Discover . Its integrated, comprehensive end-to-end platform for research allows scholars to easily discover, write and publish their research and fosters collaboration.

It includes everything you need, including a repository of over 270 million research papers across disciplines, SEO-optimized summaries and public profiles to show your expertise and experience.

If you found these tips on writing a research hypothesis useful, head over to our blog on Statistical Hypothesis Testing to learn about the top researchers, papers, and institutions in this domain.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. what is the definition of hypothesis.

According to the Oxford dictionary, a hypothesis is defined as “An idea or explanation of something that is based on a few known facts, but that has not yet been proved to be true or correct”.

2. What is an example of hypothesis?

The hypothesis is a statement that proposes a relationship between two or more variables. An example: "If we increase the number of new users who join our platform by 25%, then we will see an increase in revenue."

3. What is an example of null hypothesis?

A null hypothesis is a statement that there is no relationship between two variables. The null hypothesis is written as H0. The null hypothesis states that there is no effect. For example, if you're studying whether or not a particular type of exercise increases strength, your null hypothesis will be "there is no difference in strength between people who exercise and people who don't."

4. What are the types of research?

• Fundamental research

• Applied research

• Qualitative research

• Quantitative research

• Mixed research

• Exploratory research

• Longitudinal research

• Cross-sectional research

• Field research

• Laboratory research

• Fixed research

• Flexible research

• Action research

• Policy research

• Classification research

• Comparative research

• Causal research

• Inductive research

• Deductive research

5. How to write a hypothesis?

• Your hypothesis should be able to predict the relationship and outcome.

• Avoid wordiness by keeping it simple and brief.

• Your hypothesis should contain observable and testable outcomes.

• Your hypothesis should be relevant to the research question.

6. What are the 2 types of hypothesis?

• Null hypotheses are used to test the claim that "there is no difference between two groups of data".

• Alternative hypotheses test the claim that "there is a difference between two data groups".

7. Difference between research question and research hypothesis?

A research question is a broad, open-ended question you will try to answer through your research. A hypothesis is a statement based on prior research or theory that you expect to be true due to your study. Example - Research question: What are the factors that influence the adoption of the new technology? Research hypothesis: There is a positive relationship between age, education and income level with the adoption of the new technology.

8. What is plural for hypothesis?

The plural of hypothesis is hypotheses. Here's an example of how it would be used in a statement, "Numerous well-considered hypotheses are presented in this part, and they are supported by tables and figures that are well-illustrated."

9. What is the red queen hypothesis?

The red queen hypothesis in evolutionary biology states that species must constantly evolve to avoid extinction because if they don't, they will be outcompeted by other species that are evolving. Leigh Van Valen first proposed it in 1973; since then, it has been tested and substantiated many times.

10. Who is known as the father of null hypothesis?

The father of the null hypothesis is Sir Ronald Fisher. He published a paper in 1925 that introduced the concept of null hypothesis testing, and he was also the first to use the term itself.

11. When to reject null hypothesis?

You need to find a significant difference between your two populations to reject the null hypothesis. You can determine that by running statistical tests such as an independent sample t-test or a dependent sample t-test. You should reject the null hypothesis if the p-value is less than 0.05.

You might also like

Consensus GPT vs. SciSpace GPT: Choose the Best GPT for Research

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

Types of Essays in Academic Writing - Quick Guide (2024)

Community Blog

Keep up-to-date on postgraduate related issues with our quick reads written by students, postdocs, professors and industry leaders.

How do you Write the Rationale for Research?

• By DiscoverPhDs
• October 21, 2020

What is the Rationale of Research?

The term rationale of research means the reason for performing the research study in question. In writing your rational you should able to convey why there was a need for your study to be carried out. It’s an important part of your research paper that should explain how your research was novel and explain why it was significant; this helps the reader understand why your research question needed to be addressed in your research paper, term paper or other research report.

The rationale for research is also sometimes referred to as the justification for the study. When writing your rational, first begin by introducing and explaining what other researchers have published on within your research field.

Having explained the work of previous literature and prior research, include discussion about where the gaps in knowledge are in your field. Use these to define potential research questions that need answering and explain the importance of addressing these unanswered questions.

The rationale conveys to the reader of your publication exactly why your research topic was needed and why it was significant . Having defined your research rationale, you would then go on to define your hypothesis and your research objectives.

Final Comments

Defining the rationale research, is a key part of the research process and academic writing in any research project. You use this in your research paper to firstly explain the research problem within your dissertation topic. This gives you the research justification you need to define your research question and what the expected outcomes may be.

PhD stress is real. Learn how to combat it with these 5 tips.

Learn more about using cloud storage effectively, video conferencing calling, good note-taking solutions and online calendar and task management options.

Find out the differences between a Literature Review and an Annotated Bibliography, whey they should be used and how to write them.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Browse PhDs Now

In this post you’ll learn what the significance of the study means, why it’s important, where and how to write one in your paper or thesis with an example.

Academic conferences are expensive and it can be tough finding the funds to go; this naturally leads to the question of are academic conferences worth it?

Dr Ilesanmi has a PhD in Applied Biochemistry from the Federal University of Technology Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria. He is now a lecturer in the Department of Biochemistry at the Federal University Otuoke, Bayelsa State, Nigeria.

Lewis is a third-year PhD student at CVSSP at the University of Surrey. His research involves using multi-camera broadcast footage of sports, and using this data to create new viewpoints in virtual and augmented reality.

Join Thousands of Students

Writing an Introduction for a Scientific Paper

Dr. michelle harris, dr. janet batzli, biocore.

This section provides guidelines on how to construct a solid introduction to a scientific paper including background information, study question , biological rationale, hypothesis , and general approach . If the Introduction is done well, there should be no question in the reader’s mind why and on what basis you have posed a specific hypothesis.

Broad Question : based on an initial observation (e.g., “I see a lot of guppies close to the shore. Do guppies like living in shallow water?”). This observation of the natural world may inspire you to investigate background literature or your observation could be based on previous research by others or your own pilot study. Broad questions are not always included in your written text, but are essential for establishing the direction of your research.

Background Information : key issues, concepts, terminology, and definitions needed to understand the biological rationale for the experiment. It often includes a summary of findings from previous, relevant studies. Remember to cite references, be concise, and only include relevant information given your audience and your experimental design. Concisely summarized background information leads to the identification of specific scientific knowledge gaps that still exist. (e.g., “No studies to date have examined whether guppies do indeed spend more time in shallow water.”)

Testable Question : these questions are much more focused than the initial broad question, are specific to the knowledge gap identified, and can be addressed with data. (e.g., “Do guppies spend different amounts of time in water <1 meter deep as compared to their time in water that is >1 meter deep?”)

Biological Rationale : describes the purpose of your experiment distilling what is known and what is not known that defines the knowledge gap that you are addressing. The “BR” provides the logic for your hypothesis and experimental approach, describing the biological mechanism and assumptions that explain why your hypothesis should be true.

The biological rationale is based on your interpretation of the scientific literature, your personal observations, and the underlying assumptions you are making about how you think the system works. If you have written your biological rationale, your reader should see your hypothesis in your introduction section and say to themselves, “Of course, this hypothesis seems very logical based on the rationale presented.”

• A thorough rationale defines your assumptions about the system that have not been revealed in scientific literature or from previous systematic observation. These assumptions drive the direction of your specific hypothesis or general predictions.
• Defining the rationale is probably the most critical task for a writer, as it tells your reader why your research is biologically meaningful. It may help to think about the rationale as an answer to the questions— how is this investigation related to what we know, what assumptions am I making about what we don’t yet know, AND how will this experiment add to our knowledge? *There may or may not be broader implications for your study; be careful not to overstate these (see note on social justifications below).
• Expect to spend time and mental effort on this. You may have to do considerable digging into the scientific literature to define how your experiment fits into what is already known and why it is relevant to pursue.
• Be open to the possibility that as you work with and think about your data, you may develop a deeper, more accurate understanding of the experimental system. You may find the original rationale needs to be revised to reflect your new, more sophisticated understanding.
• As you progress through Biocore and upper level biology courses, your rationale should become more focused and matched with the level of study e ., cellular, biochemical, or physiological mechanisms that underlie the rationale. Achieving this type of understanding takes effort, but it will lead to better communication of your science.

***Special note on avoiding social justifications: You should not overemphasize the relevance of your experiment and the possible connections to large-scale processes. Be realistic and logical —do not overgeneralize or state grand implications that are not sensible given the structure of your experimental system. Not all science is easily applied to improving the human condition. Performing an investigation just for the sake of adding to our scientific knowledge (“pure or basic science”) is just as important as applied science. In fact, basic science often provides the foundation for applied studies.

Hypothesis / Predictions : specific prediction(s) that you will test during your experiment. For manipulative experiments, the hypothesis should include the independent variable (what you manipulate), the dependent variable(s) (what you measure), the organism or system , the direction of your results, and comparison to be made.

If you are doing a systematic observation , your hypothesis presents a variable or set of variables that you predict are important for helping you characterize the system as a whole, or predict differences between components/areas of the system that help you explain how the system functions or changes over time.

Experimental Approach : Briefly gives the reader a general sense of the experiment, the type of data it will yield, and the kind of conclusions you expect to obtain from the data. Do not confuse the experimental approach with the experimental protocol . The experimental protocol consists of the detailed step-by-step procedures and techniques used during the experiment that are to be reported in the Methods and Materials section.

Some Final Tips on Writing an Introduction

• As you progress through the Biocore sequence, for instance, from organismal level of Biocore 301/302 to the cellular level in Biocore 303/304, we expect the contents of your “Introduction” paragraphs to reflect the level of your coursework and previous writing experience. For example, in Biocore 304 (Cell Biology Lab) biological rationale should draw upon assumptions we are making about cellular and biochemical processes.
• Be Concise yet Specific: Remember to be concise and only include relevant information given your audience and your experimental design. As you write, keep asking, “Is this necessary information or is this irrelevant detail?” For example, if you are writing a paper claiming that a certain compound is a competitive inhibitor to the enzyme alkaline phosphatase and acts by binding to the active site, you need to explain (briefly) Michaelis-Menton kinetics and the meaning and significance of Km and Vmax. This explanation is not necessary if you are reporting the dependence of enzyme activity on pH because you do not need to measure Km and Vmax to get an estimate of enzyme activity.
• Another example: if you are writing a paper reporting an increase in Daphnia magna heart rate upon exposure to caffeine you need not describe the reproductive cycle of magna unless it is germane to your results and discussion. Be specific and concrete, especially when making introductory or summary statements.

Where Do You Discuss Pilot Studies? Many times it is important to do pilot studies to help you get familiar with your experimental system or to improve your experimental design. If your pilot study influences your biological rationale or hypothesis, you need to describe it in your Introduction. If your pilot study simply informs the logistics or techniques, but does not influence your rationale, then the description of your pilot study belongs in the Materials and Methods section.  

How will introductions be evaluated? The following is part of the rubric we will be using to evaluate your papers.

• Translation

How to write the Rationale for your research

By charlesworth author services.

• Charlesworth Author Services
• 19 November, 2021

The rationale for one’s research is the justification for undertaking a given study. It states the reason(s) why a researcher chooses to focus on the topic in question, including what the significance is and what gaps the research intends to fill. In short, it is an explanation that rationalises the need for the study. The rationale is typically followed by a hypothesis/ research question (s) and the study objectives.

When is the rationale for research written?

The rationale of a study can be presented both before and after the research is conducted. 

• Before : The rationale is a crucial part of your research proposal , representing the plan of your work as formulated before you execute your study.
• After : Once the study is completed, the rationale is presented in a research paper or dissertation to explain why you focused on the particular question. In this instance, you would link the rationale of your research project to the study aims and outcomes.

Basis for writing the research rationale

The study rationale is predominantly based on preliminary data . A literature review will help you identify gaps in the current knowledge base and also ensure that you avoid duplicating what has already been done. You can then formulate the justification for your study from the existing literature on the subject and the perceived outcomes of the proposed study.

Length of the research rationale

In a research proposal or research article, the rationale would not take up more than a few sentences . A thesis or dissertation would allow for a longer description, which could even run into a couple of paragraphs . The length might even depend on the field of study or nature of the experiment. For instance, a completely novel or unconventional approach might warrant a longer and more detailed justification.

Basic elements of the research rationale

Every research rationale should include some mention or discussion of the following: 

• An overview of your conclusions from your literature review
• Gaps in current knowledge
• Inconclusive or controversial findings from previous studies
• The need to build on previous research (e.g. unanswered questions, the need to update concepts in light of new findings and/or new technical advancements). 

Example of a research rationale

Note: This uses a fictional study.

Abc xyz is a newly identified microalgal species isolated from fish tanks. While Abc xyz algal blooms have been seen as a threat to pisciculture, some studies have hinted at their unusually high carotenoid content and unique carotenoid profile. Carotenoid profiling has been carried out only in a handful of microalgal species from this genus, and the search for microalgae rich in bioactive carotenoids has not yielded promising candidates so far. This in-depth examination of the carotenoid profile of Abc xyz will help identify and quantify novel and potentially useful carotenoids from an untapped aquaculture resource .

In conclusion

It is important to describe the rationale of your research in order to put the significance and novelty of your specific research project into perspective. Once you have successfully articulated the reason(s) for your research, you will have convinced readers of the importance of your work!

Maximise your publication success with Charlesworth Author Services.

Charlesworth Author Services , a trusted brand supporting the world’s leading academic publishers, institutions and authors since 1928. 

To know more about our services, visit: Our Services

Share with your colleagues

Scientific Editing Services

Sign up – stay updated.

We use cookies to offer you a personalized experience. By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Write a Research Hypothesis: Good & Bad Examples

What is a research hypothesis?

A research hypothesis is an attempt at explaining a phenomenon or the relationships between phenomena/variables in the real world. Hypotheses are sometimes called “educated guesses”, but they are in fact (or let’s say they should be) based on previous observations, existing theories, scientific evidence, and logic. A research hypothesis is also not a prediction—rather, predictions are ( should be) based on clearly formulated hypotheses. For example, “We tested the hypothesis that KLF2 knockout mice would show deficiencies in heart development” is an assumption or prediction, not a hypothesis. 

The research hypothesis at the basis of this prediction is “the product of the KLF2 gene is involved in the development of the cardiovascular system in mice”—and this hypothesis is probably (hopefully) based on a clear observation, such as that mice with low levels of Kruppel-like factor 2 (which KLF2 codes for) seem to have heart problems. From this hypothesis, you can derive the idea that a mouse in which this particular gene does not function cannot develop a normal cardiovascular system, and then make the prediction that we started with. 

What is the difference between a hypothesis and a prediction?

You might think that these are very subtle differences, and you will certainly come across many publications that do not contain an actual hypothesis or do not make these distinctions correctly. But considering that the formulation and testing of hypotheses is an integral part of the scientific method, it is good to be aware of the concepts underlying this approach. The two hallmarks of a scientific hypothesis are falsifiability (an evaluation standard that was introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper in 1934) and testability —if you cannot use experiments or data to decide whether an idea is true or false, then it is not a hypothesis (or at least a very bad one).

So, in a nutshell, you (1) look at existing evidence/theories, (2) come up with a hypothesis, (3) make a prediction that allows you to (4) design an experiment or data analysis to test it, and (5) come to a conclusion. Of course, not all studies have hypotheses (there is also exploratory or hypothesis-generating research), and you do not necessarily have to state your hypothesis as such in your paper. 

But for the sake of understanding the principles of the scientific method, let’s first take a closer look at the different types of hypotheses that research articles refer to and then give you a step-by-step guide for how to formulate a strong hypothesis for your own paper.

Types of Research Hypotheses

Hypotheses can be simple , which means they describe the relationship between one single independent variable (the one you observe variations in or plan to manipulate) and one single dependent variable (the one you expect to be affected by the variations/manipulation). If there are more variables on either side, you are dealing with a complex hypothesis. You can also distinguish hypotheses according to the kind of relationship between the variables you are interested in (e.g., causal or associative ). But apart from these variations, we are usually interested in what is called the “alternative hypothesis” and, in contrast to that, the “null hypothesis”. If you think these two should be listed the other way round, then you are right, logically speaking—the alternative should surely come second. However, since this is the hypothesis we (as researchers) are usually interested in, let’s start from there.

Alternative Hypothesis

If you predict a relationship between two variables in your study, then the research hypothesis that you formulate to describe that relationship is your alternative hypothesis (usually H1 in statistical terms). The goal of your hypothesis testing is thus to demonstrate that there is sufficient evidence that supports the alternative hypothesis, rather than evidence for the possibility that there is no such relationship. The alternative hypothesis is usually the research hypothesis of a study and is based on the literature, previous observations, and widely known theories. 

Null Hypothesis

The hypothesis that describes the other possible outcome, that is, that your variables are not related, is the null hypothesis ( H0 ). Based on your findings, you choose between the two hypotheses—usually that means that if your prediction was correct, you reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative. Make sure, however, that you are not getting lost at this step of the thinking process: If your prediction is that there will be no difference or change, then you are trying to find support for the null hypothesis and reject H1. 

Directional Hypothesis

While the null hypothesis is obviously “static”, the alternative hypothesis can specify a direction for the observed relationship between variables—for example, that mice with higher expression levels of a certain protein are more active than those with lower levels. This is then called a one-tailed hypothesis. 

Another example for a directional one-tailed alternative hypothesis would be that 

H1: Attending private classes before important exams has a positive effect on performance. 

Your null hypothesis would then be that

H0: Attending private classes before important exams has no/a negative effect on performance.

Nondirectional Hypothesis

A nondirectional hypothesis does not specify the direction of the potentially observed effect, only that there is a relationship between the studied variables—this is called a two-tailed hypothesis. For instance, if you are studying a new drug that has shown some effects on pathways involved in a certain condition (e.g., anxiety) in vitro in the lab, but you can’t say for sure whether it will have the same effects in an animal model or maybe induce other/side effects that you can’t predict and potentially increase anxiety levels instead, you could state the two hypotheses like this:

H1: The only lab-tested drug (somehow) affects anxiety levels in an anxiety mouse model.

You then test this nondirectional alternative hypothesis against the null hypothesis:

H0: The only lab-tested drug has no effect on anxiety levels in an anxiety mouse model.

How to Write a Hypothesis for a Research Paper

Now that we understand the important distinctions between different kinds of research hypotheses, let’s look at a simple process of how to write a hypothesis.

Writing a Hypothesis Step:1

Ask a question, based on earlier research. Research always starts with a question, but one that takes into account what is already known about a topic or phenomenon. For example, if you are interested in whether people who have pets are happier than those who don’t, do a literature search and find out what has already been demonstrated. You will probably realize that yes, there is quite a bit of research that shows a relationship between happiness and owning a pet—and even studies that show that owning a dog is more beneficial than owning a cat ! Let’s say you are so intrigued by this finding that you wonder: 

What is it that makes dog owners even happier than cat owners? 

Let’s move on to Step 2 and find an answer to that question.

Writing a Hypothesis Step 2:

Formulate a strong hypothesis by answering your own question. Again, you don’t want to make things up, take unicorns into account, or repeat/ignore what has already been done. Looking at the dog-vs-cat papers your literature search returned, you see that most studies are based on self-report questionnaires on personality traits, mental health, and life satisfaction. What you don’t find is any data on actual (mental or physical) health measures, and no experiments. You therefore decide to make a bold claim come up with the carefully thought-through hypothesis that it’s maybe the lifestyle of the dog owners, which includes walking their dog several times per day, engaging in fun and healthy activities such as agility competitions, and taking them on trips, that gives them that extra boost in happiness. You could therefore answer your question in the following way:

Dog owners are happier than cat owners because of the dog-related activities they engage in.

Now you have to verify that your hypothesis fulfills the two requirements we introduced at the beginning of this resource article: falsifiability and testability . If it can’t be wrong and can’t be tested, it’s not a hypothesis. We are lucky, however, because yes, we can test whether owning a dog but not engaging in any of those activities leads to lower levels of happiness or well-being than owning a dog and playing and running around with them or taking them on trips.  

Writing a Hypothesis Step 3:

Make your predictions and define your variables. We have verified that we can test our hypothesis, but now we have to define all the relevant variables, design our experiment or data analysis, and make precise predictions. You could, for example, decide to study dog owners (not surprising at this point), let them fill in questionnaires about their lifestyle as well as their life satisfaction (as other studies did), and then compare two groups of active and inactive dog owners. Alternatively, if you want to go beyond the data that earlier studies produced and analyzed and directly manipulate the activity level of your dog owners to study the effect of that manipulation, you could invite them to your lab, select groups of participants with similar lifestyles, make them change their lifestyle (e.g., couch potato dog owners start agility classes, very active ones have to refrain from any fun activities for a certain period of time) and assess their happiness levels before and after the intervention. In both cases, your independent variable would be “ level of engagement in fun activities with dog” and your dependent variable would be happiness or well-being . 

Examples of a Good and Bad Hypothesis

Let’s look at a few examples of good and bad hypotheses to get you started.

Good Hypothesis Examples

Bad Hypothesis Examples

Tips for Writing a Research Hypothesis

If you understood the distinction between a hypothesis and a prediction we made at the beginning of this article, then you will have no problem formulating your hypotheses and predictions correctly. To refresh your memory: We have to (1) look at existing evidence, (2) come up with a hypothesis, (3) make a prediction, and (4) design an experiment. For example, you could summarize your dog/happiness study like this:

(1) While research suggests that dog owners are happier than cat owners, there are no reports on what factors drive this difference. (2) We hypothesized that it is the fun activities that many dog owners (but very few cat owners) engage in with their pets that increases their happiness levels. (3) We thus predicted that preventing very active dog owners from engaging in such activities for some time and making very inactive dog owners take up such activities would lead to an increase and decrease in their overall self-ratings of happiness, respectively. (4) To test this, we invited dog owners into our lab, assessed their mental and emotional well-being through questionnaires, and then assigned them to an “active” and an “inactive” group, depending on… 

Note that you use “we hypothesize” only for your hypothesis, not for your experimental prediction, and “would” or “if – then” only for your prediction, not your hypothesis. A hypothesis that states that something “would” affect something else sounds as if you don’t have enough confidence to make a clear statement—in which case you can’t expect your readers to believe in your research either. Write in the present tense, don’t use modal verbs that express varying degrees of certainty (such as may, might, or could ), and remember that you are not drawing a conclusion while trying not to exaggerate but making a clear statement that you then, in a way, try to disprove . And if that happens, that is not something to fear but an important part of the scientific process.

Similarly, don’t use “we hypothesize” when you explain the implications of your research or make predictions in the conclusion section of your manuscript, since these are clearly not hypotheses in the true sense of the word. As we said earlier, you will find that many authors of academic articles do not seem to care too much about these rather subtle distinctions, but thinking very clearly about your own research will not only help you write better but also ensure that even that infamous Reviewer 2 will find fewer reasons to nitpick about your manuscript. 

Perfect Your Manuscript With Professional Editing

Now that you know how to write a strong research hypothesis for your research paper, you might be interested in our free AI Proofreader , Wordvice AI, which finds and fixes errors in grammar, punctuation, and word choice in academic texts. Or if you are interested in human proofreading , check out our English editing services , including research paper editing and manuscript editing .

On the Wordvice academic resources website , you can also find many more articles and other resources that can help you with writing the other parts of your research paper , with making a research paper outline before you put everything together, or with writing an effective cover letter once you are ready to submit.

Understanding and developing a rationale and hypotheses for an experiment

This teaching resource helps students understand and apply the importance of having a rationale when writing up a research proposal in a research methods course.

• Conducting Research
• Teaching Psychology as a Subject

The APA Committee on Associate and Baccalaureate Education awarded a Teaching Resources Award to Vanessa Woods, PhD, for her submission of the assignment on Understanding and Developing a Rationale and Hypotheses for an Experiment. This exemplar (PDF, 230KB) is featured in APA Project Assessment .

About the author

• Psychology Teacher Network

Contact Education

You may also like.

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Happiness Hub Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• Happiness Hub
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• College University and Postgraduate
• Academic Writing

How to Write a Study Rationale

Last Updated: May 19, 2023 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Jake Adams and by wikiHow staff writer, Jennifer Mueller, JD . Jake Adams is an academic tutor and the owner of Simplifi EDU, a Santa Monica, California based online tutoring business offering learning resources and online tutors for academic subjects K-College, SAT & ACT prep, and college admissions applications. With over 14 years of professional tutoring experience, Jake is dedicated to providing his clients the very best online tutoring experience and access to a network of excellent undergraduate and graduate-level tutors from top colleges all over the nation. Jake holds a BS in International Business and Marketing from Pepperdine University. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 59,147 times.

A study rationale explains the reason for a study and the importance of its findings for a particular field. Commonly, you'll need to write a study rationale as part of a university course of study, although you may also need to write one as a professional researcher to apply for funding or other support. As a student, your study rationale also justifies how it fulfills the requirements for your degree program or course of study. Do research before you write your study rationale so that you can discuss the previous work your study builds on and explain its significance to your field. Thorough research is also important in the professional context because your rationale will likely become part of the contract if funding or support is approved. [1] X Research source

Describing What You Hope to Accomplish

• For example, suppose you want to study how working the night shift affects the academic performance of college students who are taking classes during the day. A narrow question would measure a specific impact based on a specific amount of hours worked.

• Justify the methodology you're using. If there's another methodology that might accomplish the same result, describe it and explain why your methodology is superior — perhaps because it's more efficient, takes less time, or uses fewer resources. For example, you might get more information out of personal interviews, but creating an online questionnaire is more cost-effective.
• Particularly if you're seeking funding or support, this section of your rationale will also include details about the cost of your study and the facilities or resources you'll need. [3] X Research source

Tip: A methodology that is more complex, difficult, or expensive requires more justification than one that is straightforward and simple.

• For example, if you're studying the effect of working the night shift on academic performance, you might hypothesize that working 4 or more nights a week lowers students' grade point averages by more than 1 point.

• Use action words, such as "quantify" or "establish," when writing your goals. For example, you might write that one goal of your study is to "quantify the degree to which working at night inhibits the academic performance of college students."
• If you are a professional researcher, your objectives may need to be more specific and concrete. The organization you submit your rationale to will have details about the requirements to apply for funding and other support. [5] X Research source

Explaining Your Study's Significance

• Going into extensive detail usually isn't necessary. Instead, highlight the findings of the most significant work in the field that addressed a similar question.
• Provide references so that your readers can examine the previous studies for themselves and compare them to your proposed study.

• Methodological limitations: Previous studies failed to measure the variables appropriately or used a research design that had problems or biases
• Contextual limitations: Previous studies aren't relevant because circumstances have changed regarding the variables measured
• Conceptual limitations: Previous studies are too tied up in a specific ideology or framework

• For example, if a previous study had been conducted to support a university's policy that full-time students were not permitted to work, you might argue that it was too tied up in that specific ideology and that this biased the results. You could then point out that your study is not intended to advance any particular policy.

Tip: If you have to defend or present your rationale to an advisor or team, try to anticipate the questions they might ask you and include the answers to as many of those questions as possible.

Including Academic Proposal Information

• As a student, you might emphasize your major and specific classes you've taken that give you particular knowledge about the subject of your study. If you've served as a research assistant on a study with a similar methodology or covering a similar research question, you might mention that as well.
• If you're a professional researcher, focus on the experience you have in a particular field as well as the studies you've done in the past. If you have done studies with a similar methodology that were important in your field, you might mention those as well.

Tip: If you don't have any particular credentials or experience that are relevant to your study, tell the readers of your rationale what drew you to this particular topic and how you became interested in it.

• For example, if you are planning to conduct the study as fulfillment of the research requirement for your degree program, you might discuss any specific guidelines for that research requirement and list how your study meets those criteria.

• In most programs, there will be specific wording for you to include in your rationale if you're submitting it for a certain number of credits. Your instructor or advisor can help make sure you've worded this appropriately.

Study Rationale Outline and Example

Expert Q&A

• This article presents an overview of how to write a study rationale. Check with your instructor or advisor for any specific requirements that apply to your particular project. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://research.com/research/how-to-write-research-methodology
• ↑ https://ris.leeds.ac.uk/applying-for-funding/developing-your-proposal/resources-and-tips/key-questions-for-researchers/
• ↑ https://www.cwauthors.com/article/how-to-write-the-rationale-for-your-research
• ↑ http://www.writingcentre.uct.ac.za/sites/default/files/image_tool/images/167/Rationale.pdf
• ↑ https://www.niaid.nih.gov/grants-contracts/write-research-plan
• ↑ https://www.esc.edu/degree-planning-academic-review/degree-program/student-degree-planning-guide/rationale-essay-writing/writing-tips/

About This Article

• Send fan mail to authors

Did this article help you?

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Develop the tech skills you need for work and life

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Hypothesis Testing | A Step-by-Step Guide with Easy Examples

Published on November 8, 2019 by Rebecca Bevans . Revised on June 22, 2023.

Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world using statistics . It is most often used by scientists to test specific predictions, called hypotheses, that arise from theories.

There are 5 main steps in hypothesis testing:

• State your research hypothesis as a null hypothesis and alternate hypothesis (H o ) and (H a  or H 1 ).
• Collect data in a way designed to test the hypothesis.
• Perform an appropriate statistical test .
• Decide whether to reject or fail to reject your null hypothesis.
• Present the findings in your results and discussion section.

Though the specific details might vary, the procedure you will use when testing a hypothesis will always follow some version of these steps.

Table of contents

Step 1: state your null and alternate hypothesis, step 2: collect data, step 3: perform a statistical test, step 4: decide whether to reject or fail to reject your null hypothesis, step 5: present your findings, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about hypothesis testing.

After developing your initial research hypothesis (the prediction that you want to investigate), it is important to restate it as a null (H o ) and alternate (H a ) hypothesis so that you can test it mathematically.

The alternate hypothesis is usually your initial hypothesis that predicts a relationship between variables. The null hypothesis is a prediction of no relationship between the variables you are interested in.

• H 0 : Men are, on average, not taller than women. H a : Men are, on average, taller than women.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

For a statistical test to be valid , it is important to perform sampling and collect data in a way that is designed to test your hypothesis. If your data are not representative, then you cannot make statistical inferences about the population you are interested in.

There are a variety of statistical tests available, but they are all based on the comparison of within-group variance (how spread out the data is within a category) versus between-group variance (how different the categories are from one another).

If the between-group variance is large enough that there is little or no overlap between groups, then your statistical test will reflect that by showing a low p -value . This means it is unlikely that the differences between these groups came about by chance.

Alternatively, if there is high within-group variance and low between-group variance, then your statistical test will reflect that with a high p -value. This means it is likely that any difference you measure between groups is due to chance.

Your choice of statistical test will be based on the type of variables and the level of measurement of your collected data .

• an estimate of the difference in average height between the two groups.
• a p -value showing how likely you are to see this difference if the null hypothesis of no difference is true.

Based on the outcome of your statistical test, you will have to decide whether to reject or fail to reject your null hypothesis.

In most cases you will use the p -value generated by your statistical test to guide your decision. And in most cases, your predetermined level of significance for rejecting the null hypothesis will be 0.05 – that is, when there is a less than 5% chance that you would see these results if the null hypothesis were true.

In some cases, researchers choose a more conservative level of significance, such as 0.01 (1%). This minimizes the risk of incorrectly rejecting the null hypothesis ( Type I error ).

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

The results of hypothesis testing will be presented in the results and discussion sections of your research paper , dissertation or thesis .

In the results section you should give a brief summary of the data and a summary of the results of your statistical test (for example, the estimated difference between group means and associated p -value). In the discussion , you can discuss whether your initial hypothesis was supported by your results or not.

In the formal language of hypothesis testing, we talk about rejecting or failing to reject the null hypothesis. You will probably be asked to do this in your statistics assignments.

However, when presenting research results in academic papers we rarely talk this way. Instead, we go back to our alternate hypothesis (in this case, the hypothesis that men are on average taller than women) and state whether the result of our test did or did not support the alternate hypothesis.

If your null hypothesis was rejected, this result is interpreted as “supported the alternate hypothesis.”

These are superficial differences; you can see that they mean the same thing.

You might notice that we don’t say that we reject or fail to reject the alternate hypothesis . This is because hypothesis testing is not designed to prove or disprove anything. It is only designed to test whether a pattern we measure could have arisen spuriously, or by chance.

If we reject the null hypothesis based on our research (i.e., we find that it is unlikely that the pattern arose by chance), then we can say our test lends support to our hypothesis . But if the pattern does not pass our decision rule, meaning that it could have arisen by chance, then we say the test is inconsistent with our hypothesis .

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

• Normal distribution
• Descriptive statistics
• Measures of central tendency
• Correlation coefficient

Methodology

• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Types of interviews
• Cohort study
• Thematic analysis

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Survivorship bias
• Availability heuristic
• Nonresponse bias
• Regression to the mean

Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world using statistics. It is used by scientists to test specific predictions, called hypotheses , by calculating how likely it is that a pattern or relationship between variables could have arisen by chance.

A hypothesis states your predictions about what your research will find. It is a tentative answer to your research question that has not yet been tested. For some research projects, you might have to write several hypotheses that address different aspects of your research question.

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Bevans, R. (2023, June 22). Hypothesis Testing | A Step-by-Step Guide with Easy Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 30, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/hypothesis-testing/

Is this article helpful?

Rebecca Bevans

Other students also liked, choosing the right statistical test | types & examples, understanding p values | definition and examples, what is your plagiarism score.

Setting Rationale in Research: Cracking the code for excelling at research

Knowledge and curiosity lays the foundation of scientific progress. The quest for knowledge has always been a timeless endeavor. Scholars seek reasons to explain the phenomena they observe, paving way for development of research. Every investigation should offer clarity and a well-defined rationale in research is a cornerstone upon which the entire study can be built.

Research rationale is the heartbeat of every academic pursuit as it guides the researchers to unlock the untouched areas of their field. Additionally, it illuminates the gaps in the existing knowledge, and identifies the potential contributions that the study aims to make.

Table of Contents

What Is Research Rationale and When Is It Written

Research rationale is the “why” behind every academic research. It not only frames the study but also outlines its objectives , questions, and expected outcomes. Additionally, it helps to identify the potential limitations of the study . It serves as a lighthouse for researchers that guides through data collection and analysis, ensuring their efforts remain focused and purposeful. Typically, a rationale is written at the beginning of the research proposal or research paper . It is an essential component of the introduction section and provides the foundation for the entire study. Furthermore, it provides a clear understanding of the purpose and significance of the research to the readers before delving into the specific details of the study. In some cases, the rationale is written before the methodology, data analysis, and other sections. Also, it serves as the justification for the research, and how it contributes to the field. Defining a research rationale can help a researcher in following ways:

1. Justification of a Research Problem

• Research rationale helps to understand the essence of a research problem.
• It designs the right approach to solve a problem. This aspect is particularly important for applied research, where the outcomes can have real-world relevance and impact.
• Also, it explains why the study is worth conducting and why resources should be allocated to pursue it.
• Additionally, it guides a researcher to highlight the benefits and implications of a strategy.

2. Elimination of Literature Gap

• Research rationale helps to ideate new topics which are less addressed.
• Additionally, it offers fresh perspectives on existing research and discusses the shortcomings in previous studies.
• It shows that your study aims to contribute to filling these gaps and advancing the field’s understanding.

3. Originality and Novelty

• The rationale highlights the unique aspects of your research and how it differs from previous studies.
• Furthermore, it explains why your research adds something new to the field and how it expands upon existing knowledge.
• It highlights how your findings might contribute to a better understanding of a particular issue or problem and potentially lead to positive changes.
• Besides these benefits, it provides a personal motivation to the researchers. In some cases, researchers might have personal experiences or interests that drive their desire to investigate a particular topic.

4. An Increase in Chances of Funding

• It is essential to convince funding agencies , supervisors, or reviewers, that a research is worth pursuing.
• Therefore, a good rationale can get your research approved for funding and increases your chances of getting published in journals; as it addresses the potential knowledge gap in existing research.

Overall, research rationale is essential for providing a clear and convincing argument for the value and importance of your research study, setting the stage for the rest of the research proposal or manuscript. Furthermore, it helps establish the context for your work and enables others to understand the purpose and potential impact of your research.

5 Key Elements of a Research Rationale

Research rationale must include certain components which make it more impactful. Here are the key elements of a research rationale:

By incorporating these elements, you provide a strong and convincing case for the legitimacy of your research, which is essential for gaining support and approval from academic institutions, funding agencies, or other stakeholders.

How to Write a Rationale in Research

Writing a rationale requires careful consideration of the reasons for conducting the study. It is usually written in the present tense.

Here are some steps to guide you through the process of writing a research rationale:

After writing the initial draft, it is essential to review and revise the research rationale to ensure that it effectively communicates the purpose of your research. The research rationale should be persuasive and compelling, convincing readers that your study is worthwhile and deserves their attention.

How Long Should a Research Rationale be?

Although there is no pre-defined length for a rationale in research, its length may vary depending on the specific requirements of the research project. It also depends on the academic institution or organization, and the guidelines set by the research advisor or funding agency. In general, a research rationale is usually a concise and focused document.

Typically, it ranges from a few paragraphs to a few pages, but it is usually recommended to keep it as crisp as possible while ensuring all the essential elements are adequately covered. The length of a research rationale can be roughly as follows:

1. For Research Proposal:

A. Around 1 to 3 pages

B. Ensure clear and comprehensive explanation of the research question, its significance, literature review , and methodological approach.

2. Thesis or Dissertation:

A. Around 3 to 5 pages

B. Ensure an extensive coverage of the literature review, theoretical framework, and research objectives to provide a robust justification for the study.

3. Journal Article:

A. Usually concise. Ranges from few paragraphs to one page

B. The research rationale is typically included as part of the introduction section

However, remember that the quality and content of the research rationale are more important than its length. The reasons for conducting the research should be well-structured, clear, and persuasive when presented. Always adhere to the specific institution or publication guidelines.

Example of a Research Rationale

In conclusion, the research rationale serves as the cornerstone of a well-designed and successful research project. It ensures that research efforts are focused, meaningful, and ethically sound. Additionally, it provides a comprehensive and logical justification for embarking on a specific investigation. Therefore, by identifying research gaps, defining clear objectives, emphasizing significance, explaining the chosen methodology, addressing ethical considerations, and recognizing potential limitations, researchers can lay the groundwork for impactful and valuable contributions to the scientific community.

So, are you ready to delve deeper into the world of research and hone your academic writing skills? Explore Enago Academy ‘s comprehensive resources and courses to elevate your research and make a lasting impact in your field. Also, share your thoughts and experiences in the form of an article or a thought piece on Enago Academy’s Open Platform .

Join us on a journey of scholarly excellence today!

Frequently Asked Questions

A rationale of the study can be written by including the following points: 1. Background of the Research/ Study 2. Identifying the Knowledge Gap 3. An Overview of the Goals and Objectives of the Study 4. Methodology and its Significance 5. Relevance of the Research

Start writing a research rationale by defining the research problem and discussing the literature gap associated with it.

A research rationale can be ended by discussing the expected results and summarizing the need of the study.

A rationale for thesis can be made by covering the following points: 1. Extensive coverage of the existing literature 2. Explaining the knowledge gap 3. Provide the framework and objectives of the study 4. Provide a robust justification for the study/ research 5. Highlight the potential of the research and the expected outcomes

A rationale for dissertation can be made by covering the following points: 1. Highlight the existing reference 2. Bridge the gap and establish the context of your research 3. Describe the problem and the objectives 4. Give an overview of the methodology

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Promoting Research

Graphical Abstracts Vs. Infographics: Best practices for using visual illustrations for increased research impact

Dr. Sarah Chen stared at her computer screen, her eyes staring at her recently published…

• Publishing Research

10 Tips to Prevent Research Papers From Being Retracted

Research paper retractions represent a critical event in the scientific community. When a published article…

• Industry News

Google Releases 2024 Scholar Metrics, Evaluates Impact of Scholarly Articles

Google has released its 2024 Scholar Metrics, assessing scholarly articles from 2019 to 2023. This…

Ensuring Academic Integrity and Transparency in Academic Research: A comprehensive checklist for researchers

Academic integrity is the foundation upon which the credibility and value of scientific findings are…

• Reporting Research

How to Optimize Your Research Process: A step-by-step guide

For researchers across disciplines, the path to uncovering novel findings and insights is often filled…

Mitigating Survivorship Bias in Scholarly Research: 10 tips to enhance data integrity

The Power of Proofreading: Taking your academic work to the next level

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

• AI in Academia
• Career Corner
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer Review Week 2024
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process?

Research Aims, Objectives & Questions

The “Golden Thread” Explained Simply (+ Examples)

By: David Phair (PhD) and Alexandra Shaeffer (PhD) | June 2022

The research aims , objectives and research questions (collectively called the “golden thread”) are arguably the most important thing you need to get right when you’re crafting a research proposal , dissertation or thesis . We receive questions almost every day about this “holy trinity” of research and there’s certainly a lot of confusion out there, so we’ve crafted this post to help you navigate your way through the fog.

Overview: The Golden Thread

• What is the golden thread
• What are research aims ( examples )
• What are research objectives ( examples )
• What are research questions ( examples )
• The importance of alignment in the golden thread

What is the “golden thread”?  

The golden thread simply refers to the collective research aims , research objectives , and research questions for any given project (i.e., a dissertation, thesis, or research paper ). These three elements are bundled together because it’s extremely important that they align with each other, and that the entire research project aligns with them.

Importantly, the golden thread needs to weave its way through the entirety of any research project , from start to end. In other words, it needs to be very clearly defined right at the beginning of the project (the topic ideation and proposal stage) and it needs to inform almost every decision throughout the rest of the project. For example, your research design and methodology will be heavily influenced by the golden thread (we’ll explain this in more detail later), as well as your literature review.

The research aims, objectives and research questions (the golden thread) define the focus and scope ( the delimitations ) of your research project. In other words, they help ringfence your dissertation or thesis to a relatively narrow domain, so that you can “go deep” and really dig into a specific problem or opportunity. They also help keep you on track , as they act as a litmus test for relevance. In other words, if you’re ever unsure whether to include something in your document, simply ask yourself the question, “does this contribute toward my research aims, objectives or questions?”. If it doesn’t, chances are you can drop it.

Alright, enough of the fluffy, conceptual stuff. Let’s get down to business and look at what exactly the research aims, objectives and questions are and outline a few examples to bring these concepts to life.

Research Aims: What are they?

Simply put, the research aim(s) is a statement that reflects the broad overarching goal (s) of the research project. Research aims are fairly high-level (low resolution) as they outline the general direction of the research and what it’s trying to achieve .

Research Aims: Examples  

True to the name, research aims usually start with the wording “this research aims to…”, “this research seeks to…”, and so on. For example:

“This research aims to explore employee experiences of digital transformation in retail HR.”   “This study sets out to assess the interaction between student support and self-care on well-being in engineering graduate students”  

As you can see, these research aims provide a high-level description of what the study is about and what it seeks to achieve. They’re not hyper-specific or action-oriented, but they’re clear about what the study’s focus is and what is being investigated.

Need a helping hand?

Research Objectives: What are they?

The research objectives take the research aims and make them more practical and actionable . In other words, the research objectives showcase the steps that the researcher will take to achieve the research aims.

The research objectives need to be far more specific (higher resolution) and actionable than the research aims. In fact, it’s always a good idea to craft your research objectives using the “SMART” criteria. In other words, they should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound”.

Research Objectives: Examples  

Let’s look at two examples of research objectives. We’ll stick with the topic and research aims we mentioned previously.  

For the digital transformation topic:

To observe the retail HR employees throughout the digital transformation. To assess employee perceptions of digital transformation in retail HR. To identify the barriers and facilitators of digital transformation in retail HR.

And for the student wellness topic:

To determine whether student self-care predicts the well-being score of engineering graduate students. To determine whether student support predicts the well-being score of engineering students. To assess the interaction between student self-care and student support when predicting well-being in engineering graduate students.

  As you can see, these research objectives clearly align with the previously mentioned research aims and effectively translate the low-resolution aims into (comparatively) higher-resolution objectives and action points . They give the research project a clear focus and present something that resembles a research-based “to-do” list.

Research Questions: What are they?

Finally, we arrive at the all-important research questions. The research questions are, as the name suggests, the key questions that your study will seek to answer . Simply put, they are the core purpose of your dissertation, thesis, or research project. You’ll present them at the beginning of your document (either in the introduction chapter or literature review chapter) and you’ll answer them at the end of your document (typically in the discussion and conclusion chapters).  

The research questions will be the driving force throughout the research process. For example, in the literature review chapter, you’ll assess the relevance of any given resource based on whether it helps you move towards answering your research questions. Similarly, your methodology and research design will be heavily influenced by the nature of your research questions. For instance, research questions that are exploratory in nature will usually make use of a qualitative approach, whereas questions that relate to measurement or relationship testing will make use of a quantitative approach.  

Let’s look at some examples of research questions to make this more tangible.

Research Questions: Examples  

Again, we’ll stick with the research aims and research objectives we mentioned previously.  

For the digital transformation topic (which would be qualitative in nature):

How do employees perceive digital transformation in retail HR? What are the barriers and facilitators of digital transformation in retail HR?  

And for the student wellness topic (which would be quantitative in nature):

Does student self-care predict the well-being scores of engineering graduate students? Does student support predict the well-being scores of engineering students? Do student self-care and student support interact when predicting well-being in engineering graduate students?  

You’ll probably notice that there’s quite a formulaic approach to this. In other words, the research questions are basically the research objectives “converted” into question format. While that is true most of the time, it’s not always the case. For example, the first research objective for the digital transformation topic was more or less a step on the path toward the other objectives, and as such, it didn’t warrant its own research question.  

So, don’t rush your research questions and sloppily reword your objectives as questions. Carefully think about what exactly you’re trying to achieve (i.e. your research aim) and the objectives you’ve set out, then craft a set of well-aligned research questions . Also, keep in mind that this can be a somewhat iterative process , where you go back and tweak research objectives and aims to ensure tight alignment throughout the golden thread.

The importance of strong alignment 

Alignment is the keyword here and we have to stress its importance . Simply put, you need to make sure that there is a very tight alignment between all three pieces of the golden thread. If your research aims and research questions don’t align, for example, your project will be pulling in different directions and will lack focus . This is a common problem students face and can cause many headaches (and tears), so be warned.

Take the time to carefully craft your research aims, objectives and research questions before you run off down the research path. Ideally, get your research supervisor/advisor to review and comment on your golden thread before you invest significant time into your project, and certainly before you start collecting data .  

Recap: The golden thread

In this post, we unpacked the golden thread of research, consisting of the research aims , research objectives and research questions . You can jump back to any section using the links below.

As always, feel free to leave a comment below – we always love to hear from you. Also, if you’re interested in 1-on-1 support, take a look at our private coaching service here.

Psst... there’s more!

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

41 Comments

Thank you very much for your great effort put. As an Undergraduate taking Demographic Research & Methodology, I’ve been trying so hard to understand clearly what is a Research Question, Research Aim and the Objectives in a research and the relationship between them etc. But as for now I’m thankful that you’ve solved my problem.

Well appreciated. This has helped me greatly in doing my dissertation.

An so delighted with this wonderful information thank you a lot.

so impressive i have benefited a lot looking forward to learn more on research.

I am very happy to have carefully gone through this well researched article.

Infact,I used to be phobia about anything research, because of my poor understanding of the concepts.

Now,I get to know that my research question is the same as my research objective(s) rephrased in question format.

I please I would need a follow up on the subject,as I intends to join the team of researchers. Thanks once again.

Thanks so much. This was really helpful.

I know you pepole have tried to break things into more understandable and easy format. And God bless you. Keep it up

i found this document so useful towards my study in research methods. thanks so much.

This is my 2nd read topic in your course and I should commend the simplified explanations of each part. I’m beginning to understand and absorb the use of each part of a dissertation/thesis. I’ll keep on reading your free course and might be able to avail the training course! Kudos!

Thank you! Better put that my lecture and helped to easily understand the basics which I feel often get brushed over when beginning dissertation work.

This is quite helpful. I like how the Golden thread has been explained and the needed alignment.

This is quite helpful. I really appreciate!

The article made it simple for researcher students to differentiate between three concepts.

Very innovative and educational in approach to conducting research.

I am very impressed with all these terminology, as I am a fresh student for post graduate, I am highly guided and I promised to continue making consultation when the need arise. Thanks a lot.

A very helpful piece. thanks, I really appreciate it .

Very well explained, and it might be helpful to many people like me.

Wish i had found this (and other) resource(s) at the beginning of my PhD journey… not in my writing up year… 😩 Anyways… just a quick question as i’m having some issues ordering my “golden thread”…. does it matter in what order you mention them? i.e., is it always first aims, then objectives, and finally the questions? or can you first mention the research questions and then the aims and objectives?

Thank you for a very simple explanation that builds upon the concepts in a very logical manner. Just prior to this, I read the research hypothesis article, which was equally very good. This met my primary objective.

My secondary objective was to understand the difference between research questions and research hypothesis, and in which context to use which one. However, I am still not clear on this. Can you kindly please guide?

In research, a research question is a clear and specific inquiry that the researcher wants to answer, while a research hypothesis is a tentative statement or prediction about the relationship between variables or the expected outcome of the study. Research questions are broader and guide the overall study, while hypotheses are specific and testable statements used in quantitative research. Research questions identify the problem, while hypotheses provide a focus for testing in the study.

Exactly what I need in this research journey, I look forward to more of your coaching videos.

This helped a lot. Thanks so much for the effort put into explaining it.

What data source in writing dissertation/Thesis requires?

What is data source covers when writing dessertation/thesis

This is quite useful thanks

I’m excited and thankful. I got so much value which will help me progress in my thesis.

where are the locations of the reserch statement, research objective and research question in a reserach paper? Can you write an ouline that defines their places in the researh paper?

Very helpful and important tips on Aims, Objectives and Questions.

Thank you so much for making research aim, research objectives and research question so clear. This will be helpful to me as i continue with my thesis.

Thanks much for this content. I learned a lot. And I am inspired to learn more. I am still struggling with my preparation for dissertation outline/proposal. But I consistently follow contents and tutorials and the new FB of GRAD Coach. Hope to really become confident in writing my dissertation and successfully defend it.

As a researcher and lecturer, I find splitting research goals into research aims, objectives, and questions is unnecessarily bureaucratic and confusing for students. For most biomedical research projects, including ‘real research’, 1-3 research questions will suffice (numbers may differ by discipline).

Awesome! Very important resources and presented in an informative way to easily understand the golden thread. Indeed, thank you so much.

Well explained

The blog article on research aims, objectives, and questions by Grad Coach is a clear and insightful guide that aligns with my experiences in academic research. The article effectively breaks down the often complex concepts of research aims and objectives, providing a straightforward and accessible explanation. Drawing from my own research endeavors, I appreciate the practical tips offered, such as the need for specificity and clarity when formulating research questions. The article serves as a valuable resource for students and researchers, offering a concise roadmap for crafting well-defined research goals and objectives. Whether you’re a novice or an experienced researcher, this article provides practical insights that contribute to the foundational aspects of a successful research endeavor.

A great thanks for you. it is really amazing explanation. I grasp a lot and one step up to research knowledge.

I really found these tips helpful. Thank you very much Grad Coach.

I found this article helpful. Thanks for sharing this.

thank you so much, the explanation and examples are really helpful

This is a well researched and superbly written article for learners of research methods at all levels in the research topic from conceptualization to research findings and conclusions. I highly recommend this material to university graduate students. As an instructor of advanced research methods for PhD students, I have confirmed that I was giving the right guidelines for the degree they are undertaking.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

Hypothesis vs. Rationale — What's the Difference?

Difference Between Hypothesis and Rationale

Table of contents, key differences, comparison chart, usage in research, requirements, compare with definitions, common curiosities, what is a hypothesis, can a rationale be part of a hypothesis, how are hypotheses tested, does every research need a hypothesis, how detailed should a rationale be, how does a hypothesis differ from a theory, what types of research benefit most from a clear rationale, what happens if a hypothesis is refuted, what is the purpose of a rationale, is a rationale subject to testing, can a hypothesis lead to the development of a theory, how should a hypothesis be formulated, why is a rationale important in research, can both a hypothesis and a rationale be included in a single study, how can a rationale affect the outcome of research, share your discovery.

Author Spotlight

Popular Comparisons

Trending Comparisons

New Comparisons

Trending Terms

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.53(4); 2010 Aug

Research questions, hypotheses and objectives

Patricia farrugia.

* Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, the

Bradley A. Petrisor

† Division of Orthopaedic Surgery and the

Forough Farrokhyar

‡ Departments of Surgery and

§ Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont

Mohit Bhandari

There is an increasing familiarity with the principles of evidence-based medicine in the surgical community. As surgeons become more aware of the hierarchy of evidence, grades of recommendations and the principles of critical appraisal, they develop an increasing familiarity with research design. Surgeons and clinicians are looking more and more to the literature and clinical trials to guide their practice; as such, it is becoming a responsibility of the clinical research community to attempt to answer questions that are not only well thought out but also clinically relevant. The development of the research question, including a supportive hypothesis and objectives, is a necessary key step in producing clinically relevant results to be used in evidence-based practice. A well-defined and specific research question is more likely to help guide us in making decisions about study design and population and subsequently what data will be collected and analyzed. 1

Objectives of this article

In this article, we discuss important considerations in the development of a research question and hypothesis and in defining objectives for research. By the end of this article, the reader will be able to appreciate the significance of constructing a good research question and developing hypotheses and research objectives for the successful design of a research study. The following article is divided into 3 sections: research question, research hypothesis and research objectives.

Research question

Interest in a particular topic usually begins the research process, but it is the familiarity with the subject that helps define an appropriate research question for a study. 1 Questions then arise out of a perceived knowledge deficit within a subject area or field of study. 2 Indeed, Haynes suggests that it is important to know “where the boundary between current knowledge and ignorance lies.” 1 The challenge in developing an appropriate research question is in determining which clinical uncertainties could or should be studied and also rationalizing the need for their investigation.

Increasing one’s knowledge about the subject of interest can be accomplished in many ways. Appropriate methods include systematically searching the literature, in-depth interviews and focus groups with patients (and proxies) and interviews with experts in the field. In addition, awareness of current trends and technological advances can assist with the development of research questions. 2 It is imperative to understand what has been studied about a topic to date in order to further the knowledge that has been previously gathered on a topic. Indeed, some granting institutions (e.g., Canadian Institute for Health Research) encourage applicants to conduct a systematic review of the available evidence if a recent review does not already exist and preferably a pilot or feasibility study before applying for a grant for a full trial.

In-depth knowledge about a subject may generate a number of questions. It then becomes necessary to ask whether these questions can be answered through one study or if more than one study needed. 1 Additional research questions can be developed, but several basic principles should be taken into consideration. 1 All questions, primary and secondary, should be developed at the beginning and planning stages of a study. Any additional questions should never compromise the primary question because it is the primary research question that forms the basis of the hypothesis and study objectives. It must be kept in mind that within the scope of one study, the presence of a number of research questions will affect and potentially increase the complexity of both the study design and subsequent statistical analyses, not to mention the actual feasibility of answering every question. 1 A sensible strategy is to establish a single primary research question around which to focus the study plan. 3 In a study, the primary research question should be clearly stated at the end of the introduction of the grant proposal, and it usually specifies the population to be studied, the intervention to be implemented and other circumstantial factors. 4

Hulley and colleagues 2 have suggested the use of the FINER criteria in the development of a good research question ( Box 1 ). The FINER criteria highlight useful points that may increase the chances of developing a successful research project. A good research question should specify the population of interest, be of interest to the scientific community and potentially to the public, have clinical relevance and further current knowledge in the field (and of course be compliant with the standards of ethical boards and national research standards).

FINER criteria for a good research question

Adapted with permission from Wolters Kluwer Health. 2

Whereas the FINER criteria outline the important aspects of the question in general, a useful format to use in the development of a specific research question is the PICO format — consider the population (P) of interest, the intervention (I) being studied, the comparison (C) group (or to what is the intervention being compared) and the outcome of interest (O). 3 , 5 , 6 Often timing (T) is added to PICO ( Box 2 ) — that is, “Over what time frame will the study take place?” 1 The PICOT approach helps generate a question that aids in constructing the framework of the study and subsequently in protocol development by alluding to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and identifying the groups of patients to be included. Knowing the specific population of interest, intervention (and comparator) and outcome of interest may also help the researcher identify an appropriate outcome measurement tool. 7 The more defined the population of interest, and thus the more stringent the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the greater the effect on the interpretation and subsequent applicability and generalizability of the research findings. 1 , 2 A restricted study population (and exclusion criteria) may limit bias and increase the internal validity of the study; however, this approach will limit external validity of the study and, thus, the generalizability of the findings to the practical clinical setting. Conversely, a broadly defined study population and inclusion criteria may be representative of practical clinical practice but may increase bias and reduce the internal validity of the study.

PICOT criteria 1

A poorly devised research question may affect the choice of study design, potentially lead to futile situations and, thus, hamper the chance of determining anything of clinical significance, which will then affect the potential for publication. Without devoting appropriate resources to developing the research question, the quality of the study and subsequent results may be compromised. During the initial stages of any research study, it is therefore imperative to formulate a research question that is both clinically relevant and answerable.

Research hypothesis

The primary research question should be driven by the hypothesis rather than the data. 1 , 2 That is, the research question and hypothesis should be developed before the start of the study. This sounds intuitive; however, if we take, for example, a database of information, it is potentially possible to perform multiple statistical comparisons of groups within the database to find a statistically significant association. This could then lead one to work backward from the data and develop the “question.” This is counterintuitive to the process because the question is asked specifically to then find the answer, thus collecting data along the way (i.e., in a prospective manner). Multiple statistical testing of associations from data previously collected could potentially lead to spuriously positive findings of association through chance alone. 2 Therefore, a good hypothesis must be based on a good research question at the start of a trial and, indeed, drive data collection for the study.

The research or clinical hypothesis is developed from the research question and then the main elements of the study — sampling strategy, intervention (if applicable), comparison and outcome variables — are summarized in a form that establishes the basis for testing, statistical and ultimately clinical significance. 3 For example, in a research study comparing computer-assisted acetabular component insertion versus freehand acetabular component placement in patients in need of total hip arthroplasty, the experimental group would be computer-assisted insertion and the control/conventional group would be free-hand placement. The investigative team would first state a research hypothesis. This could be expressed as a single outcome (e.g., computer-assisted acetabular component placement leads to improved functional outcome) or potentially as a complex/composite outcome; that is, more than one outcome (e.g., computer-assisted acetabular component placement leads to both improved radiographic cup placement and improved functional outcome).

However, when formally testing statistical significance, the hypothesis should be stated as a “null” hypothesis. 2 The purpose of hypothesis testing is to make an inference about the population of interest on the basis of a random sample taken from that population. The null hypothesis for the preceding research hypothesis then would be that there is no difference in mean functional outcome between the computer-assisted insertion and free-hand placement techniques. After forming the null hypothesis, the researchers would form an alternate hypothesis stating the nature of the difference, if it should appear. The alternate hypothesis would be that there is a difference in mean functional outcome between these techniques. At the end of the study, the null hypothesis is then tested statistically. If the findings of the study are not statistically significant (i.e., there is no difference in functional outcome between the groups in a statistical sense), we cannot reject the null hypothesis, whereas if the findings were significant, we can reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternate hypothesis (i.e., there is a difference in mean functional outcome between the study groups), errors in testing notwithstanding. In other words, hypothesis testing confirms or refutes the statement that the observed findings did not occur by chance alone but rather occurred because there was a true difference in outcomes between these surgical procedures. The concept of statistical hypothesis testing is complex, and the details are beyond the scope of this article.

Another important concept inherent in hypothesis testing is whether the hypotheses will be 1-sided or 2-sided. A 2-sided hypothesis states that there is a difference between the experimental group and the control group, but it does not specify in advance the expected direction of the difference. For example, we asked whether there is there an improvement in outcomes with computer-assisted surgery or whether the outcomes worse with computer-assisted surgery. We presented a 2-sided test in the above example because we did not specify the direction of the difference. A 1-sided hypothesis states a specific direction (e.g., there is an improvement in outcomes with computer-assisted surgery). A 2-sided hypothesis should be used unless there is a good justification for using a 1-sided hypothesis. As Bland and Atlman 8 stated, “One-sided hypothesis testing should never be used as a device to make a conventionally nonsignificant difference significant.”

The research hypothesis should be stated at the beginning of the study to guide the objectives for research. Whereas the investigators may state the hypothesis as being 1-sided (there is an improvement with treatment), the study and investigators must adhere to the concept of clinical equipoise. According to this principle, a clinical (or surgical) trial is ethical only if the expert community is uncertain about the relative therapeutic merits of the experimental and control groups being evaluated. 9 It means there must exist an honest and professional disagreement among expert clinicians about the preferred treatment. 9

Designing a research hypothesis is supported by a good research question and will influence the type of research design for the study. Acting on the principles of appropriate hypothesis development, the study can then confidently proceed to the development of the research objective.

Research objective

The primary objective should be coupled with the hypothesis of the study. Study objectives define the specific aims of the study and should be clearly stated in the introduction of the research protocol. 7 From our previous example and using the investigative hypothesis that there is a difference in functional outcomes between computer-assisted acetabular component placement and free-hand placement, the primary objective can be stated as follows: this study will compare the functional outcomes of computer-assisted acetabular component insertion versus free-hand placement in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Note that the study objective is an active statement about how the study is going to answer the specific research question. Objectives can (and often do) state exactly which outcome measures are going to be used within their statements. They are important because they not only help guide the development of the protocol and design of study but also play a role in sample size calculations and determining the power of the study. 7 These concepts will be discussed in other articles in this series.

From the surgeon’s point of view, it is important for the study objectives to be focused on outcomes that are important to patients and clinically relevant. For example, the most methodologically sound randomized controlled trial comparing 2 techniques of distal radial fixation would have little or no clinical impact if the primary objective was to determine the effect of treatment A as compared to treatment B on intraoperative fluoroscopy time. However, if the objective was to determine the effect of treatment A as compared to treatment B on patient functional outcome at 1 year, this would have a much more significant impact on clinical decision-making. Second, more meaningful surgeon–patient discussions could ensue, incorporating patient values and preferences with the results from this study. 6 , 7 It is the precise objective and what the investigator is trying to measure that is of clinical relevance in the practical setting.

The following is an example from the literature about the relation between the research question, hypothesis and study objectives:

Study: Warden SJ, Metcalf BR, Kiss ZS, et al. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound for chronic patellar tendinopathy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Rheumatology 2008;47:467–71.

Research question: How does low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) compare with a placebo device in managing the symptoms of skeletally mature patients with patellar tendinopathy?

Research hypothesis: Pain levels are reduced in patients who receive daily active-LIPUS (treatment) for 12 weeks compared with individuals who receive inactive-LIPUS (placebo).

Objective: To investigate the clinical efficacy of LIPUS in the management of patellar tendinopathy symptoms.

The development of the research question is the most important aspect of a research project. A research project can fail if the objectives and hypothesis are poorly focused and underdeveloped. Useful tips for surgical researchers are provided in Box 3 . Designing and developing an appropriate and relevant research question, hypothesis and objectives can be a difficult task. The critical appraisal of the research question used in a study is vital to the application of the findings to clinical practice. Focusing resources, time and dedication to these 3 very important tasks will help to guide a successful research project, influence interpretation of the results and affect future publication efforts.

Tips for developing research questions, hypotheses and objectives for research studies

• Perform a systematic literature review (if one has not been done) to increase knowledge and familiarity with the topic and to assist with research development.
• Learn about current trends and technological advances on the topic.
• Seek careful input from experts, mentors, colleagues and collaborators to refine your research question as this will aid in developing the research question and guide the research study.
• Use the FINER criteria in the development of the research question.
• Ensure that the research question follows PICOT format.
• Develop a research hypothesis from the research question.
• Develop clear and well-defined primary and secondary (if needed) objectives.
• Ensure that the research question and objectives are answerable, feasible and clinically relevant.

FINER = feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, relevant; PICOT = population (patients), intervention (for intervention studies only), comparison group, outcome of interest, time.

Competing interests: No funding was received in preparation of this paper. Dr. Bhandari was funded, in part, by a Canada Research Chair, McMaster University.

Empathy, Sympathy, And Emotion Regulation: A Meta-Analytic Review

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.

Learn about our Editorial Process

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.

Empathy involves sharing another’s emotional experience, while sympathy refers to feeling concern for someone in distress without necessarily experiencing their emotions. Emotion regulation (ER) is the process of modifying one’s emotional reactions to meet situational demands. ER may facilitate sympathy by helping individuals manage vicarious distress, allowing them to focus on others’ needs rather than becoming overwhelmed. In contrast, the relationship between ER and empathy is less clear, as empathic responses can occur automatically without regulation. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for interpreting the complex interplay between emotional processes in social-emotional development.

• The meta-analysis examined associations between emotion regulation (ER) and empathy/sympathy in childhood and adolescence.
• Overall, there was a small but significant positive association between ER and empathy/sympathy (r = .19).
• When accounting for measurement conflation, ER was significantly associated with sympathy (r = .24) but not empathy (r = .04).
• Associations were generally consistent across sample characteristics like age, sex, and culture.
• Methodological factors like measurement conflation and use of physiological vs. self-report measures moderated effect sizes.
• The findings highlight the importance of distinguishing between empathy and sympathy conceptually and methodologically.
• Results suggest ER may be more critical for developing sympathy than empathy in childhood/adolescence.

This meta-analysis aimed to clarify associations between emotion regulation (ER) and empathy/sympathy in childhood and adolescence.

While ER, empathy, and sympathy are considered key components of social-emotional development (Malti, 2021), empirical evidence on their interrelations has been mixed.

Some studies find positive associations between ER and empathy/sympathy (e.g., Jambon et al., 2019), while others report null or negative links (e.g., Christensen et al., 2011).

These inconsistencies may stem from variations in how constructs are defined and measured. Despite longstanding arguments to distinguish empathy and sympathy (Eisenberg, 2000), many researchers use the terms interchangeably.

Additionally, ER measures often conflate emotional and behavioral regulation.

By meta-analytically examining these associations and potential moderators, this study aimed to clarify when and why ER relates to empathy and/or sympathy across development.

A key goal was to test if ER differentially relates to empathy versus sympathy when accounting for measurement issues.

This analysis addresses important conceptual and methodological gaps in understanding the foundations of social-emotional competence in childhood and adolescence.

The researchers conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of studies examining associations between ER and empathy/sympathy in typically developing children and adolescents.

• Systematic literature search of major databases (e.g., Web of Science, PsycInfo)
• Screening of abstracts and full texts based on inclusion criteria
• Coding of study characteristics and effect sizes by multiple coders
• Calculation of overall effect sizes and moderator analyses using random effects models
• 75 effect sizes from 58 studies
• Total N = 25,831 participants
• Ages ranged from infancy to late adolescence (0-18 years)
• Studies conducted across multiple countries/cultures
• Emotion regulation: Self-report, other-report, observational, and physiological (RSA) measures
• Empathy/sympathy: Self-report, other-report, and observational measures
• Coded for measurement conflation (e.g., empathy scales including sympathy items)

Statistical measures

• Random effects meta-analysis
• Moderator analyses using Q statistics
• Meta-regression for continuous moderators
• Publication bias assessed via funnel plot, trim-and-fill, and Egger’s test

Hypothesis 1: There will be a significant positive association between ER and empathy/sympathy.

Result: Supported. Overall combined effect size r = .19, p < .001.

Hypothesis 2: The association between ER and empathy/sympathy will be moderated by measurement conflation.

Result: Supported. Studies with multiply conflated empathy/sympathy measures showed larger effects (r = .40) than unconflated measures (r = .14).

Hypothesis 3: ER will be more strongly associated with sympathy than empathy when accounting for measurement conflation.

Result: Supported. For unconflated measures, ER was significantly associated with sympathy (r = .24, p < .001) but not empathy (r = .04, p = .38).

Hypothesis 4: Associations between ER and empathy/sympathy will be moderated by measurement method.

Result: Partially supported. Nonphysiological ER measures showed larger effects than RSA measures. Shared-method/informant variance inflated effects.

Hypothesis 5: Associations will be consistent across sample characteristics (e.g., age, sex, culture).

Result: Largely supported. Few significant differences across demographic moderators, except lower effects in infancy/toddlerhood vs. older ages.

This meta-analysis provides the first comprehensive synthesis of research on associations between emotion regulation (ER) and empathy/sympathy in childhood and adolescence.

The overall small but significant positive association suggests that better ER relates to higher empathy/sympathy across development.

However, the key insight is that this association appears to be driven primarily by sympathy rather than empathy when measurement issues are accounted for.

The finding that ER was significantly associated with sympathy but not empathy (for unconflated measures) is particularly informative.

It suggests that the ability to regulate one’s emotions may be more critical for developing sympathetic concern for others than for the more automatic process of empathic arousal.

This aligns with theories proposing that ER helps children manage vicarious distress and focus on others’ needs rather than becoming overwhelmed by personal distress.

These results extend previous research by clarifying the distinct roles of empathy and sympathy in relation to ER.

They highlight the importance of differentiating these constructs both conceptually and methodologically – something many past studies have failed to do.

The findings also demonstrate how measurement conflation can lead to inflated or misleading effect sizes, particularly for empathy.

The largely consistent results across age (except early infancy), sex, and culture suggest these associations may reflect fundamental aspects of social-emotional development.

However, the moderation by measurement approaches (e.g., physiological vs. self-report) indicates the need for multi-method assessment to fully capture these complex constructs.

Future research should prioritize longitudinal and experimental designs to clarify causal and developmental processes.

Studies examining potential mediators (e.g., attention allocation, cognitive reappraisal) could further elucidate mechanisms linking ER to sympathy.

Additionally, research on clinical populations could reveal how these associations may differ in the context of psychopathology.

The study had many methodological strengths, including:

• Comprehensive literature search and coding
• Large combined sample size (N = 25,831)
• Inclusion of unpublished studies to mitigate publication bias
• Examination of multiple potential moderators
• Careful consideration of measurement issues (conflation, shared method/informant variance)
• Differentiation of empathy and sympathy
• Inclusion of both self-report and physiological measures of ER

Limitations

This study also has several methodological limitations, including:

• Cross-sectional nature of included studies limits causal inferences
• Reliance on self-report measures for many studies
• Limited number of studies for some moderator categories (e.g., non-Western samples)
• Exclusion of clinical populations limits generalizability
• Focus on affective aspects of ER and empathy may not capture full complexity of constructs
• Potential language bias due to inclusion of only English-language publications

These limitations suggest caution in generalizing results, particularly to clinical populations or non-Western cultures.

The cross-sectional data also prevent strong conclusions about developmental processes or causal relationships between ER and empathy/sympathy.

Implications

The results have significant implications for understanding social-emotional development and informing interventions:

• Differentiation of empathy and sympathy: Researchers and practitioners should carefully distinguish these constructs, as they appear to have different relationships with ER.
• Promotion of sympathy: Interventions aiming to increase sympathetic concern may benefit from incorporating ER training.
• Measurement approaches: Studies should use unconflated measures and multi-method assessment to accurately capture ER, empathy, and sympathy.
• Developmental considerations: While associations appear largely consistent across childhood and adolescence, early infancy may require distinct theoretical and measurement approaches.
• Cultural generalizability: The similar patterns across cultures suggest these may be fundamental aspects of social-emotional development, but more research in non-Western contexts is needed.
• Clinical applications: Understanding links between ER and sympathy could inform treatments for conditions characterized by empathy/sympathy deficits (e.g., conduct problems, autism spectrum disorders).

Variables that may influence the results include measurement approach, presence of psychopathology, and specific ER strategies assessed.

The findings underscore the complexity of social-emotional processes and the need for nuanced, developmentally-sensitive research and interventions.

Primary reference

Yavuz, H. M., Colasante, T., Galarneau, E., & Malti, T. (2024). Empathy, sympathy, and emotion regulation: A meta-analytic review.  Psychological Bulletin, 150 (1), 27–44.  https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000426

Other references

Christensen, K. J., Padilla-Walker, L. M., Busby, D. M., Hardy, S. A., & Day, R. D. (2011). Relational and social-cognitive correlates of early adolescents’ forgiveness of parents.  Journal of adolescence ,  34 (5), 903-913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.01.001

Eisenberg, N. (2000). Emotion, regulation, and moral development.  Annual review of psychology ,  51 (1), 665-697. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.665

Jambon, M., Colasante, T., Peplak, J., & Malti, T. (2019). Anger, sympathy, and children’s reactive and proactive aggression: Testing a differential correlate hypothesis.  Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology ,  47 , 1013-1024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-018-0498-3

Malti, T. (2021). Kindness: A perspective from developmental psychology.  European Journal of Developmental Psychology ,  18 (5), 629-657. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2020.1837617

Keep Learning

• How might the distinction between empathy and sympathy inform interventions to promote prosocial behavior in children?
• What are potential explanations for why emotion regulation appears more strongly related to sympathy than empathy?
• How could future studies address the limitations of cross-sectional designs in examining links between emotion regulation and empathy/sympathy?
• What are the implications of these findings for understanding social-emotional development in clinical populations (e.g., autism spectrum disorders)?
• How might cultural factors influence the relationships between emotion regulation, empathy, and sympathy? How could future research better address cross-cultural variations?

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Published: 29 August 2024

Executive function deficits in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder

• Michael J. Kofler   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8604-3647 1 ,
• Elia F. Soto   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6672-287X 2 ,
• Leah J. Singh   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0242-2859 1 ,
• Sherelle L. Harmon   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7727-6908 1 ,
• Emma M. Jaisle   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4882-7501 3 ,
• Jessica N. Smith   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3559-4895 3 ,
• Kathleen E. Feeney   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8442-7866 3 &
• Erica D. Musser 4  

Nature Reviews Psychology ( 2024 ) Cite this article

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Autism spectrum disorders
• Signs and symptoms

Executive function deficits have been reported in both autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, little is known regarding which, if any, of these impairments are shared in children with ADHD and those with ASD. In this Review, we provide an overview of the current literature with a critical eye toward diagnostic, measurement and third-variable considerations that should be leveraged to provide more definitive answers. We conclude that the field’s understanding of executive function profiles in ASD and ADHD is highly limited because most research on each of these disorders has failed to account for the possible co-occurrence and the presence of symptoms of the other disorder. A vast majority of studies have relied on traditional neuropsychological tests and informant-rated executive function scales that have poor specificity and construct validity, and most studies have been unable to account for the well-documented between-person heterogeneity within and across disorders. At present, the most parsimonious conclusion is that children with ADHD and/or ASD tend to perform moderately worse than neurotypical children on a broad range of neuropsychological tests. However, the extent to which these difficulties are unique to one of these disorders or shared, or are attributable to impairments in specific executive functions, remains largely unknown. We end with focused recommendations for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

55,14 € per year

only 4,60 € per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on SpringerLink
• Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

Symptoms of autism in Williams syndrome: a transdiagnostic approach

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder traits are a more important predictor of internalising problems than autistic traits

American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edn (American Psychiatric Association, 2022).

Polanczyk, G., de Lima, M. S., Horta, B. L., Biederman, J. & Rohde, L. A. The worldwide prevalence of ADHD: a systematic review and metaregression analysis. Am. J. Psychiat. 164 , 942–948 (2007).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Polanczyk, G. V., Willcutt, E. G., Salum, G. A., Kieling, C. & Rohde, L. A. ADHD prevalence estimates across three decades: an updated systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Int. J. Epidemiol. 43 , 434–442 (2014).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Boyle, C. A. et al. Trends in the prevalence of developmental disabilities in US children, 1997–2008. Pediatrics 127 , 1034–1042 (2011).

Kogan, M. D. et al. Prevalence of parent-reported diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder among children in the US, 2007. Pediatrics 124 , 1395–1403 (2009).

Federico, A. et al. Predictors of autism spectrum disorder and ADHD: results from the national survey of children’s health. Disabil. Health J. 17 , 101512 (2023).

Aduen, P. A. et al. Social problems in ADHD: is it a skills acquisition or performance problem? J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 40 , 440–451 (2018).

Kofler, M. J. et al. Neurocognitive and behavioral predictors of social problems in ADHD: a Bayesian framework. Neuropsychology 32 , 344–355 (2018).

Ros, R. & Graziano, P. A. Social functioning in children with or at risk for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a meta-analytic review. J. Clin. Child. Adolesc. Psychol. 47 , 213–235 (2018).

Pedreño, C., Pousa, E., Navarro, J., Pàmias, M. & Obiols, J. Exploring the components of advanced theory of mind in autism spectrum disorder. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 47 , 2401–2409 (2017).

Grzadzinski, R., Dick, C., Lord, C. & Bishop, S. Parent-reported and clinician-observed autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms in children with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): implications for practice under DSM-5. Molec. Autism 7 , 7 (2016).

Article   Google Scholar  

Locke, J., Shih, W., Kretzmann, M. & Kasari, C. Examining playground engagement between elementary school children with and without autism spectrum disorder. Autism 20 , 653–662 (2016).

Gates, J. A., McNair, M. L., Richards, J. K. & Lerner, M. D. Social knowledge & performance in autism: a critical review & recommendations. Clin. Child. Fam. Psychol. Rev. 26 , 665–689 (2023).

Demetriou, E. A., DeMayo, M. M. & Guastella, A. J. Executive function in autism spectrum disorder: history, theoretical models, empirical findings, and potential as an endophenotype. Front. Psychiat. 10 , 753 (2019).

Kofler, M. J. et al. Reaction time variability in ADHD: a meta-analytic review of 319 studies. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 33 , 795–811 (2013).

Nigg, J. T. Annual research review: on the relations among self-regulation, self-control, executive functioning, effortful control, cognitive control, impulsivity, risk-taking, and inhibition for developmental psychopathology. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 58 , 361–383 (2017).

Barrasso-Catanzaro, C. & Eslinger, P. J. Neurobiological bases of executive function and social-emotional development: typical and atypical brain changes. Fam. Relat. 65 , 108–119 (2016).

Diamond, A. Activities and programs that improve children’s executive functions. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 21 , 335–341 (2012).

Miyake, A. et al. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cogn. Psychol. 41 , 49–100 (2000).

Diamond, A. Executive functions. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 64 , 135–168 (2013).

Baddeley, A. Working memory: theories, models, and controversies. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 63 , 1–29 (2012).

Wiemers, E. A. & Redick, T. S. Working memory capacity and intra-individual variability of proactive control. Acta Psychol. 182 , 21–31 (2018).

Raiker, J. S., Rapport, M. D., Kofler, M. J. & Sarver, D. E. Objectively-measured impulsivity and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): testing competing predictions from the working memory and behavioral inhibition models of ADHD. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 40 , 699–713 (2012).

Patros, C. H. et al. Visuospatial working memory underlies choice-impulsivity in boys with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Res. Dev. Disabil. 38 , 134–144 (2015).

Singh, L. J., Gaye, F., Cole, A. M., Chan, E. S. & Kofler, M. J. Central executive training for ADHD: effects on academic achievement, productivity, and success in the classroom. Neuropsychology 36 , 330–345 (2022).

Demaray, M. K. & Jenkins, L. N. Relations among academic enablers and academic achievement in children with and without high levels of parent-rated symptoms of inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity. Psychol. Sch. 48 , 573–586 (2011).

Barkley, R. A. Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychol. Bull. 121 , 65–94 (1997).

Pennington, B. F. & Ozonoff, S. Executive functions and developmental psychopathology. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 37 , 51–87 (1996).

Rapport, M. D., Chung, K.-M., Shore, G. & Isaacs, P. A conceptual model of child psychopathology: implications for understanding attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and treatment efficacy. J. Clin. Child. Adolesc. Psychol. 30 , 48–58 (2001).

Kofler, M. J., Raiker, J. S., Sarver, D. E., Wells, E. L. & Soto, E. F. Is hyperactivity ubiquitous in ADHD or dependent on environmental demands? Evidence from meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 46 , 12–24 (2016).

Kofler, M. J. et al. Working memory deficits and social problems in children with ADHD. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 39 , 805–817 (2011).

Groves, N. B. et al. Executive functioning and emotion regulation in children with and without ADHD. Res. Child. Adolesc. Psychopathol. 50 , 721–735 (2021).

Kofler, M. J., Rapport, M. D., Bolden, J., Sarver, D. E. & Raiker, J. S. ADHD and working memory: the impact of central executive deficits and exceeding storage/rehearsal capacity on observed inattentive behavior. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 38 , 149–161 (2010).

Hill, E. L. Evaluating the theory of executive dysfunction in autism. Dev. Rev. 24 , 189–233 (2004).

Leung, R. C., Vogan, V. M., Powell, T. L., Anagnostou, E. & Taylor, M. J. The role of executive functions in social impairment in autism spectrum disorder. Child. Neuropsychol. 22 , 336–344 (2016).

Mostert-Kerckhoffs, M. A., Staal, W. G., Houben, R. H. & de Jonge, M. V. Stop and change: inhibition and flexibility skills are related to repetitive behavior in children and young adults with autism spectrum disorders. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 45 , 3148–3158 (2015).

Ozonoff, S. in Learning and Cognition in Autism: Current Issues in Autism (eds Schopler, E. & Mesibov, G. B.) 199–219 (Springer, 1995).

Karr, J. E. et al. The unity and diversity of executive functions: a systematic review and re-analysis of latent variable studies. Psychol. Bull. 144 , 1147–1185 (2018).

Miyake, A. & Friedman, N. P. The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: four general conclusions. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 21 , 8–14 (2012).

Wiebe, S. A. et al. The structure of executive function in 3-year-olds. J. Exp. Child. Psychol. 108 , 436–452 (2011).

Zelazo, P. D., Craik, F. I. & Booth, L. Executive function across the life span. Acta Psychol. 115 , 167–183 (2004).

Lerner, M. D. & Lonigan, C. J. Executive function among preschool children: unitary versus distinct abilities. J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 36 , 626–639 (2014).

St Clair-Thompson, H. L. & Gathercole, S. E. Executive functions and achievements in school: shifting, updating, inhibition, and working memory. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 59 , 745–759 (2006).

Kofler, M. J. et al. Working memory and organizational skills problems in ADHD. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 59 , 57–67 (2018).

Jaroslawska, A. J., Gathercole, S. E., Logie, M. R. & Holmes, J. Following instructions in a virtual school: does working memory play a role? Mem. Cogn. 44 , 580–589 (2016).

Engle, R. W. & Kane, M. J. in The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory Vol. 44 (ed. Ross, B. H.) 145–199 (Elsevier Science, 2004).

Chacko, A., Kofler, M. & Jarrett, M. Improving outcomes for youth with ADHD: a conceptual framework for combined neurocognitive and skill-based treatment approaches. Clin. Child. Fam. Psychol. Rev. 17 , 368–384 (2014).

Antshel, K. M. & Russo, N. Autism spectrum disorders and ADHD: overlapping phenomenology, diagnostic issues, and treatment considerations. Curr. Psychiat. Rep. 21 , 34 (2019).

Townes, P. et al. Do ASD and ADHD have distinct executive function deficits? A systematic review and meta-analysis of direct comparison studies. J. Atten. Disord. 27 , 1571–1582 (2023).

Sullivan, G. M. & Feinn, R. Using effect size — or why the P value is not enough. J. Grad. Med. Educ. 4 , 279–282 (2012).

Kofler, M. J. et al. Executive functioning heterogeneity in pediatric ADHD. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 47 , 273–286 (2019).

Pievsky, M. A. & McGrath, R. E. The neurocognitive profile of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a review of meta-analyses. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 33 , 143–157 (2018).

Kasper, L. J., Alderson, R. M. & Hudec, K. L. Moderators of working memory deficits in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): a meta-analytic review. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 32 , 605–617 (2012).

Fosco, W. D., Kofler, M. J., Groves, N. B., Chan, E. S. & Raiker, J. S. Which ‘working’components of working memory aren’t working in youth with ADHD? J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 48 , 647–660 (2020).

Wager, T. D. & Smith, E. E. Neuroimaging studies of working memory. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 3 , 255–274 (2003).

Kofler, M. J. et al. Working memory and short-term memory deficits in ADHD: a bifactor modeling approach. Neuropsychology 34 , 686–698 (2020).

Pauli-Pott, U. & Becker, K. Neuropsychological basic deficits in preschoolers at risk for ADHD: a meta-analysis. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 31 , 626–637 (2011).

Schoemaker, K., Mulder, H., Deković, M. & Matthys, W. Executive functions in preschool children with externalizing behavior problems: a meta-analysis. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 41 , 457–471 (2013).

Demetriou, E. A. et al. Autism spectrum disorders: a meta-analysis of executive function. Mol. Psychiat. 23 , 1198–1204 (2018).

Habib, A., Harris, L., Pollick, F. & Melville, C. A meta-analysis of working memory in individuals with autism spectrum disorders. PLoS ONE 14 , e0216198 (2019).

Wang, Y. et al. A meta-analysis of working memory impairments in autism spectrum disorders. Neuropsychol. Rev. 27 , 46–61 (2017).

Edmunds, S. R., Colman, C., Vidal, P. & Faja, S. Brief report: examining the links between language processes and working memory impairments in toddlers and preschoolers with ASD. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 52 , 1872–1880 (2022).

Lai, C. L. E. et al. Meta-analysis of neuropsychological measures of executive functioning in children and adolescents with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder. Autism Res. 10 , 911–939 (2017).

Yerys, B. E. et al. Set-shifting in children with autism spectrum disorders: reversal shifting deficits on the Intradimensional/Extradimensional Shift Test correlate with repetitive behaviors. Autism 13 , 523–538 (2009).

Yerys, B. E. et al. Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms moderate cognition and behavior in children with autism spectrum disorders. Autism Res. 2 , 322–333 (2009).

Karalunas, S. L. et al. Overlapping and distinct cognitive impairments in attention-deficit/hyperactivity and autism spectrum disorder without intellectual disability. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 46 , 1705–1716 (2018).

Craig, F. et al. A review of executive function deficits in autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsychiat. Dis. Treat . 12 , 1191–1202 (2016).

Google Scholar  

Neely, R. J., Green, J. L., Sciberras, E., Hazell, P. & Anderson, V. Relationship between executive functioning and symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder in 6–8 year old children. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 46 , 3270–3280 (2016).

Sinzig, J., Morsch, D., Bruning, N., Schmidt, M. H. & Lehmkuhl, G. Inhibition, flexibility, working memory and planning in autism spectrum disorders with and without comorbid ADHD-symptoms. Child. Adolesc. Psychiat. Ment. Health 2 , 1–4 (2008).

Benallie, K. J., McClain, M. B., Bakner, K. E., Roanhorse, T. & Ha, J. Executive functioning in children with ASD + ADHD and ASD + ID: a systematic review. Res. Autism Spectr. Disord. 86 , 101807 (2021).

Carroll, A. G. Comparing Executive Functioning Impairments Across Clinical Groups: Autism Spectrum Disorder, Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, and Their Comorbid Occurrence in Children PhD thesis https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/comparing-executive-functioning-impairments/docview/2594697995/se-2?accountid=15728 (Indiana Univ. Pennsylvania, 2022).

Alderson, R. M., Rapport, M. D., Sarver, D. E. & Kofler, M. J. ADHD and behavioral inhibition: a re-examination of the stop-signal task. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 36 , 989–998 (2008).

Alderson, R. M., Rapport, M. D. & Kofler, M. J. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and behavioral inhibition: a meta-analytic review of the stop-signal paradigm. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 35 , 745–758 (2007).

Wright, L., Lipszyc, J., Dupuis, A., Thayapararajah, S. W. & Schachar, R. Response inhibition and psychopathology: a meta-analysis of go/no-go task performance. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 123 , 429–439 (2014).

Lipszyc, J. & Schachar, R. Inhibitory control and psychopathology: a meta-analysis of studies using the stop signal task. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 16 , 1064–1076 (2010).

Lansbergen, M. M., Kenemans, J. L. & van Engeland, H. Stroop interference and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychology 21 , 251–262 (2007).

Mullane, J. C., Corkum, P. V., Klein, R. M. & McLaughlin, E. Interference control in children with and without ADHD: a systematic review of Flanker and Simon task performance. Child. Neuropsychol. 15 , 321–342 (2009).

Geurts, H. M., van den Bergh, S. F. W. M. & Ruzzano, L. Prepotent response inhibition and interference control in autism spectrum disorders: two meta-analyses. Autism Res. 7 , 407–420 (2014).

Tonizzi, I., Giofrè, D. & Usai, M. C. Inhibitory control in autism spectrum disorders: meta-analyses on indirect and direct measures. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 52 , 4949–4965 (2022).

Irwin, L. N., Kofler, M. J., Soto, E. F. & Groves, N. B. Do children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have set shifting deficits? Neuropsychology 33 , 470–481 (2019).

Irwin, L. N., Groves, N. B., Soto, E. F. & Kofler, M. J. Is there a functional relation between set shifting and hyperactivity in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)? J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 26 , 1019–1027 (2020).

Irwin Harper, L. N., Groves, N. B., Marsh, C. L., Cole, A. M. & Kofler, M. J. Does training working memory or inhibitory control produce far-transfer improvements in set shifting for children with ADHD? A randomized controlled trial. Child. Neuropsychol. 29 , 825–845 (2023).

Reed, P. Behavioural flexibility of children with autism spectrum disorder on a card-sorting task with varying task difficulty. Heliyon 4 , e00842 (2018).

Miller, H. L., Ragozzino, M. E., Cook, E. H., Sweeney, J. A. & Mosconi, M. W. Cognitive set shifting deficits and their relationship to repetitive behaviors in autism spectrum disorder. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 45 , 805–815 (2015).

Chen, S.-F. et al. Deficits in executive functions among youths with autism spectrum disorders: an age-stratified analysis. Psychol. Med. 46 , 1625–1638 (2016).

Boshomane, T. T., Pillay, B. J. & Meyer, A. Mental flexibility (set-shifting) deficits in children with ADHD: a replication and extension study. J. Psychol. Afr. 31 , 344–349 (2021).

Fair, D. A., Bathula, D., Nikolas, M. A. & Nigg, J. T. Distinct neuropsychological subgroups in typically developing youth inform heterogeneity in children with ADHD. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109 , 6769–6774 (2012).

Dajani, D. R., Llabre, M. M., Nebel, M. B., Mostofsky, S. H. & Uddin, L. Q. Heterogeneity of executive functions among comorbid neurodevelopmental disorders. Sci. Rep. 6 , 36566 (2016).

Karalunas, S. L. et al. Heterogeneity in development of aspects of working memory predicts longitudinal attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptom change. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 126 , 774–792 (2017).

Irwin, L. N. et al. Activities of daily living and working memory in pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Child. Neuropsychol. 27 , 468–490 (2021).

Korkman, M., Kirk, U. & Kemp, S. NEPSY II: Clinical and Interpretive Manual (Harcourt Assessment, PsychCorp, 2007).

Wechsler, D. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children 5th edn (WISC-V) ( Pearson, 2014).

Andersson, A. et al. Research review: the strength of the genetic overlap between ADHD and other psychiatric symptoms — a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 61 , 1173–1183 (2020).

Yerys, B. E. et al. Evaluation of the ADHD rating scale in youth with autism. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 47 , 90–100 (2017).

Zhou, X., Reynolds, C., Zhu, J. & Kamphaus, R. W. Differentiating autism from ADHD in children and adolescents using BASC-3. J. Pediatr. Neuropsychol. 6 , 61–65 (2020).

Rosen, T. E., Mazefsky, C. A., Vasa, R. A. & Lerner, M. D. Co-occurring psychiatric conditions in autism spectrum disorder. Int. Rev. Psychiat. 30 , 40–61 (2018).

Mazefsky, C. A. et al. ASD, a psychiatric disorder, or both? Psychiatric diagnoses in adolescents with high-functioning ASD. J. Clin. Child. Adolesc. Psychol. 41 , 516–523 (2012).

Miodovnik, A., Harstad, E., Sideridis, G. & Huntington, N. Timing of the diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder. Pediatrics 136 , e830–e837 (2015).

Katusic, M. Z., Myers, S. M., Weaver, A. L. & Voigt, R. G. IQ in autism spectrum disorder: a population-based birth cohort study. Pediatrics 148 , e2020049899 (2021).

Witwer, A. N. & Lecavalier, L. Validity of comorbid psychiatric disorders in youngsters with autism spectrum disorders. J. Dev. Phys. Disabil. 22 , 367–380 (2010).

Musser, E. D. et al. Shared familial transmission of autism spectrum and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 55 , 819–827 (2014).

Lerner, M. D. et al. Verbal ability and psychiatric symptoms in clinically referred inpatient and outpatient youth with ASD. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 48 , 3689–3701 (2018).

Engle, R. W., Tuholski, S. W., Laughlin, J. E. & Conway, A. R. Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: a latent-variable approach. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 128 , 309–331 (1999).

Giofrè, D., Mammarella, I. C. & Cornoldi, C. The structure of working memory and how it relates to intelligence in children. Intelligence 41 , 396–406 (2013).

Tourva, A., Spanoudis, G. & Demetriou, A. Cognitive correlates of developing intelligence: the contribution of working memory, processing speed and attention. Intelligence 54 , 136–146 (2016).

Lilienfeld, S. O. & Landfield, K. in P sychopathology: History, Diagnosis, and Empirical Foundations (eds Craighead, W. E., Miklowitz, D. J. & Craighead, L. W.) 1–33 (John Wiley & Sons, 2008).

Brown, T. A. & Barlow, D. H. A proposal for a dimensional classification system based on the shared features of the DSM-IV anxiety and mood disorders: implications for assessment and treatment. Psychol. Assess. 21 , 256–271 (2009).

Cuthbert, B. N. & Insel, T. R. Toward the future of psychiatric diagnosis: the seven pillars of RDoC. BMC Med. 11 , 126 (2013).

Sokolova, E. et al. A causal and mediation analysis of the comorbidity between attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD).  J. Autism Dev. Disord. 47 , 1595–1604 (2017).

Krakowski, A. D. et al. Characterizing the ASD–ADHD phenotype: measurement structure and invariance in a clinical sample. J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 63 , 1534–1543 (2022).

Anning, K. L., Langley, K., Hobson, C. & Van Goozen, S. H. M. Dimensional associations between executive function processes and symptoms of ADHD, ASD, oppositional defiance and anxiety in young school-referred children. Cortex 167 , 132–147 (2023).

Snyder, H. R., Miyake, A. & Hankin, B. L. Advancing understanding of executive function impairments and psychopathology: bridging the gap between clinical and cognitive approaches. Front. Psychol. 6 , 328 (2015).

Semrud-Clikeman, M. & Ellison, P. A. T. Child Neuropsychology (Springer, 2009).

Sattler, J. Assessment of Children: Cognitive Foundations and Applications and Resource Guide to Accompany Assessment of Children: Cognitive Foundations and Applications (Sattler, 2018).

Benson, N. F. et al. Test use and assessment practices of school psychologists in the United States: findings from the 2017 national survey. J. Sch. Psychol. 72 , 29–48 (2019).

Delis, D. C., Kaplan, E. & Kramer, J. H. Delis–Kaplan Executive Function System Assessment D-KEFS Database 10.1037/t15082-000 (APA PsycTests, 2001).

Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S. & Mather, N. Woodcock–Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities (Riverside Publishing, 2001).

Sonuga-Barke, E. J., Sergeant, J. A., Nigg, J. & Willcutt, E. Executive dysfunction and delay aversion in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: nosologic and diagnostic implications. Child. Adolesc. Psychiat. Clin. N. Am. 17 , 367–384 (2008).

Canivez, G. L., Dombrowski, S. C. & Watkins, M. W. Factor structure of the WISC-V in four standardization age groups: exploratory and hierarchical factor analyses with the 16 primary and secondary subtests. Psychol. Sch. 55 , 741–769 (2018).

Floyd, R. G., Bergeron, R., Hamilton, G. & Parra, G. R. How do executive functions fit with the Cattell–Horn–Carroll model? Some evidence from a joint factor analysis of the Delis–Kaplan executive function system and the Woodcock–Johnson III tests of cognitive abilities. Psychol. Sch. 47 , 721–738 (2010).

Singh, L. J., Floyd, R. G., Reynolds, M. R., Pike, N. A. & Huenergarde, M. C. What does the developmental Neuropsychological Assessment–II (NEPSY-II) measure in children ages 7 to 12? A structural and psychometric analysis. Child Neuropsychol . https://doi.org/10.1080/09297049.2024.2357376 (2024).

Abad, F. J., Sorrel, M. A., Román, F. J. & Colom, R. The relationships between WAIS-IV factor index scores and educational level: a bifactor model approach. Psychol. Assess. 28 , 987 (2016).

Canivez, G. L. et al. Construct validity of the WISC-V in clinical cases: exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the 10 primary subtests. Assessment 27 , 274–296 (2020).

Canivez, G. L., Watkins, M. W. & Dombrowski, S. C. Factor structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children — Fifth edition: exploratory factor analyses with the 16 primary and secondary subtests. Psychol. Assess. 28 , 975–986 (2016).

Dombrowski, S. C., Canivez, G. L. & Watkins, M. W. Factor structure of the 10 WISC-V primary subtests across four standardization age groups. Contemp. Sch. Psychol. 22 , 90–104 (2018).

Dombrowski, S. C., Canivez, G. L., Watkins, M. W. & Beaujean, A. A. Exploratory bifactor analysis of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children — Fifth edition with the 16 primary and secondary subtests. Intelligence 53 , 194–201 (2015).

Gignac, G. E. & Watkins, M. W. Bifactor modeling and the estimation of model-based reliability in the WAIS-IV. Multivar. Behav. Res. 48 , 639–662 (2013).

Kranzler, J. H., Benson, N. & Floyd, R. G. Using estimated factor scores from a bifactor analysis to examine the unique effects of the latent variables measured by the WAIS-IV on academic achievement. Psychol. Assess. 27 , 1402–1416 (2015).

Watkins, M. W. et al. Long-term stability of Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children — 5th edition scores in a clinical sample. Appl. Neuropsychol. Child. 11 , 422–428 (2022).

Wells, E. L., Kofler, M. J., Soto, E. F., Schaefer, H. S. & Sarver, D. E. Assessing working memory in children with ADHD: minor administration and scoring changes may improve digit span backward’s construct validity. Res. Dev. Disabil. 72 , 166–178 (2018).

Conway, A. R. et al. Working memory span tasks: a methodological review and user’s guide. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 12 , 769–786 (2005).

Soto, E. F. et al. Executive functioning rating scales: ecologically valid or construct invalid? Neuropsychology 34 , 605–619 (2020).

Rapport, M. D., Orban, S. A., Kofler, M. J. & Friedman, L. M. Do programs designed to train working memory, other executive functions, and attention benefit children with ADHD? A meta-analytic review of cognitive, academic, and behavioral outcomes. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 33 , 1237–1252 (2013).

Redick, T. S. & Lindsey, D. R. Complex span and n -back measures of working memory: a meta-analysis. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 20 , 1102–1113 (2013).

Isquith, P. K., Roth, R. M. & Gioia, G. Contribution of rating scales to the assessment of executive functions. Appl. Neuropsychol. Child. 2 , 125–132 (2013).

Toplak, M. E., West, R. F. & Stanovich, K. E. Practitioner review: do performance-based measures and ratings of executive function assess the same construct? J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 54 , 131–143 (2013).

Miranda, A., Colomer, C., Mercader, J., Fernández, M. I. & Presentación, M. J. Performance-based tests versus behavioral ratings in the assessment of executive functioning in preschoolers: associations with ADHD symptoms and reading achievement. Front. Psychol. 6 , 545 (2015).

Nordvall, O., Jonsson, B. & Neely, A. S. Self-reported and performance-based measures of executive functions in interned youth. Psychol. Crime. Law 23 , 240–253 (2017).

Spiegel, J. A., Lonigan, C. J. & Phillips, B. M. Factor structure and utility of the behavior rating inventory of executive function — preschool version. Psychol. Assess. 29 , 172–185 (2017).

Friedman, N. P. & Miyake, A. Unity and diversity of executive functions: individual differences as a window on cognitive structure. Cortex 86 , 186–204 (2017).

Biederman, J. et al. Impact of executive function deficits and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) on academic outcomes in children. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 72 , 757–766 (2004).

Coghill, D. R., Seth, S. & Matthews, K. A comprehensive assessment of memory, delay aversion, timing, inhibition, decision making and variability in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: advancing beyond the three-pathway models. Psychol. Med. 44 , 1989–2001 (2014).

Nigg, J. T., Willcutt, E. G., Doyle, A. E. & Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S. Causal heterogeneity in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: do we need neuropsychologically impaired subtypes? Biol. Psychiat. 57 , 1224–1230 (2005).

Willcutt, E. G., Doyle, A. E., Nigg, J. T., Faraone, S. V. & Pennington, B. F. Validity of the executive function theory of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a meta-analytic review. Biol. Psychiat. 57 , 1336–1346 (2005).

Solanto, M. V. et al. The ecological validity of delay aversion and response inhibition as measures of impulsivity in AD/HD: a supplement to the NIMH multimodal treatment study of AD/HD. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 29 , 215–228 (2001).

Sonuga-Barke, E., Bitsakou, P. & Thompson, M. Beyond the dual pathway model: evidence for the dissociation of timing, inhibitory, and delay-related impairments in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. J. Am. Acad. Child. Adolesc. Psychiat. 49 , 345–355 (2010).

Willoughby, M. T. & Blair, C. B. Measuring executive function in early childhood: a case for formative measurement. Psychol. Assess. 28 , 319 (2016).

Redick, T. S. et al. Measuring working memory capacity with automated complex span tasks. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 28 , 164–171 (2012).

Nee, D. E. et al. A meta-analysis of executive components of working memory. Cereb. Cortex 23 , 264–282 (2013).

Kofler, M. J. et al. Rethinking hyperactivity in pediatric ADHD: preliminary evidence for a reconceptualization of hyperactivity/impulsivity from the perspective of informant perceptual processes. Psychol. Assess. 32 , 752–767 (2020).

Hwang-Gu, S.-L. et al. Symptoms of ADHD affect intrasubject variability in youths with autism spectrum disorder: an ex-Gaussian analysis. J. Clin. Child. Adolesc. Psychol. 48 , 455–468 (2019).

Fosco, W. D. et al. Inhibitory control and information processing in ADHD: comparing the dual task and performance adjustment hypotheses. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 47 , 961–974 (2019).

Kofler, M. J. et al. Working memory and intraindividual variability as neurocognitive indicators in ADHD: examining competing model predictions. Neuropsychology 28 , 459–471 (2014).

Rapport, M. D. et al. Working memory deficits in boys with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): the contribution of central executive and subsystem processes. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 36 , 825–837 (2008).

Kofler, M. J. et al. A randomized controlled trial of central executive training (CET) versus inhibitory control training (ICT) for ADHD. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 88 , 738–756 (2020).

Chan, E. S. M., Gaye, F., Cole, A. M., Singh, L. J. & Kofler, M. J. Central executive training for ADHD: impact on organizational skills at home and school. A randomized controlled trial. Neuropsychology 37 , 859–871 (2023).

Kofler, M. J., Sarver, D. E. & Wells, E. L. Working memory and increased activity level (hyperactivity) in ADHD: experimental evidence for a functional relation. J. Atten. Disord. 24 , 1330–1344 (2020).

Rapport, M. D. et al. Hyperactivity in boys with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): a ubiquitous core symptom or manifestation of working memory deficits? J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 37 , 521–534 (2009).

Schachar, R. J. et al. Autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: shared or unique neurocognitive profiles? Res. Child. Adolesc. Psychopathol. 51 , 17–31 (2023).

Alderson, R. M., Rapport, M. D., Hudec, K. L., Sarver, D. E. & Kofler, M. J. Competing core processes in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): do working memory deficiencies underlie behavioral inhibition deficits? J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 38 , 497–507 (2010).

Alderson, R. M. et al. Working memory and behavioral inhibition in boys with ADHD: an experimental examination of competing models. Child. Neuropsychol. 23 , 255–272 (2017).

Kofler, M. J. et al. Working memory and information processing in ADHD: evidence for directionality of effects. Neuropsychology 34 , 127–143 (2020).

Goschke, T. Dysfunctions of decision-making and cognitive control as transdiagnostic mechanisms of mental disorders: advances, gaps, and needs in current research. Int. J. Methods Psychiat. Res. 23 , 41–57 (2014).

Bennett, C. L., Petros, T. V., Johnson, M. & Ferraro, F. R. Individual differences in the influence of time of day on executive functions. Am. J. Psychol. 121 , 349–361 (2008).

Lara, T., Madrid, J. A. & Correa, Á. The vigilance decrement in executive function is attenuated when individual chronotypes perform at their optimal time of day. PLoS ONE 9 , e88820 (2014).

Constantino, J. N. & Todd, R. D. Autistic traits in the general population: a twin study. Arch. Gen. Psychiat. 60 , 524–530 (2003).

Robinson, E. B. et al. Evidence that autistic traits show the same etiology in the general population and at the quantitative extremes (5%, 2.5%, and 1%). Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 68 , 1113–1121 (2011).

McLennan, J. D. Understanding attention deficit hyperactivity disorder as a continuum. Can. Fam. Physician 62 , 979–982 (2016).

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Yang, Y. et al. Child executive function and future externalizing and internalizing problems: a meta-analysis of prospective longitudinal studies. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 97 , 102194 (2022).

Dennis, M. et al. Why IQ is not a covariate in cognitive studies of neurodevelopmental disorders. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 15 , 331–343 (2009).

Howard, S. J. et al. Challenging socioeconomic status: a cross-cultural comparison of early executive function. Dev. Sci. 23 , e12854 (2020).

Alloway, T. P., Alloway, R. G. & Wootan, S. Home sweet home: does where you live matter to working memory and other cognitive skills? J. Exp. Child. Psychol. 124 , 124–131 (2014).

Bitsko, R. H. et al. Mental health surveillance among children — United States, 2013–2019. MMWR Suppl. 71 , 1–42 (2022).

Maenner, M. J. et al. Prevalence and characteristics of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years — autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, 11 sites, United States, 2020. MMWR Surveill. Summ. 72 , 1–14 (2023).

Lai, M.-C., Lombardo, M. V., Auyeung, B., Chakrabarti, B. & Baron-Cohen, S. Sex/gender differences and autism: setting the scene for future research. J. Am. Acad. Child. Adolesc. Psychiat. 54 , 11–24 (2015).

Millenet, S. et al. Sex-specific trajectories of ADHD symptoms from adolescence to young adulthood. Eur. Child. Adolesc. Psychiat. 27 , 1067–1075 (2018).

Cockcroft, K. Are working memory models WEIRD? Testing models of working memory in a non-WEIRD sample. Neuropsychology 36 , 456–467 (2022).

Cheon, B. K., Melani, I. & Hong, Y. How USA-centric is psychology? An archival study of implicit assumptions of generalizability of findings to human nature based on origins of study samples. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 11 , 928–937 (2020).

Webber-Ritchey, K. J. et al. Recruitment strategies to optimize participation by diverse populations. Nurs. Sci. Q. 34 , 235–243 (2021).

Rowley, S. J. & Camacho, T. C. Increasing diversity in cognitive developmental research: issues and solutions. J. Cogn. Dev. 16 , 683–692 (2015).

Buchanan, N. T., Perez, M., Prinstein, M. J. & Thurston, I. B. Upending racism in psychological science: strategies to change how science is conducted, reported, reviewed, and disseminated. Am. Psychol. 76 , 1097–1112 (2021).

Werner, K. M., Inzlicht, M. & Ford, B. Q. Whither inhibition? Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 31 , 333–339 (2022).

Kofler, M. J. et al. Working memory and inhibitory control deficits in children with ADHD: an experimental evaluation of competing model predictions. Front. Psychiat. 15 , 1277583 (2024).

Howlett, C. A., Miles, S., Berryman, C., Phillipou, A. & Moseley, G. L. Conflation between self-report and neurocognitive assessments of cognitive flexibility: a critical review of the Jingle Fallacy. Aust. J. Psychol. 75 , 2174684 (2023).

Abikoff, H. et al. Remediating organizational functioning in children with ADHD: immediate and long-term effects from a randomized controlled trial. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 81 , 113–128 (2013).

Verbruggen, F., Chambers, C. D. & Logan, G. D. Fictitious inhibitory differences: how skewness and slowing distort the estimation of stopping latencies. Psychol. Sci. 24 , 352–362 (2013).

Duncan, A., Tamm, L., Birnschein, A. M. & Becker, S. P. Clinical correlates of sluggish cognitive tempo in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Autism 23 , 1354–1362 (2019).

McFayden, T. et al. Sluggish cognitive tempo in autism spectrum disorder, ADHD, and their comorbidity: implications for impairment. J. Clin. Child. Adolesc. Psychol. 51 , 195–202 (2022).

Becker, S. P. et al. The internal, external, and diagnostic validity of sluggish cognitive tempo: a meta-analysis and critical review. J. Am. Acad. Child. Adolesc. Psychiat. 55 , 163–178 (2016).

Becker, S. P. & Barkley, R. A. Sluggish cognitive tempo. In Oxford Textbook of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (eds Banaschewski, T., Coghill, D. & Zuddas, A.) Ch. 15, 147–153 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2018).

McBurnett, K. et al. Structure and validity of sluggish cognitive tempo using an expanded item pool in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol. 42 , 37–48 (2014).

Kofler, M. J. et al. What cognitive processes are “sluggish” in sluggish cognitive tempo? J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 87 , 1030 (2019).

Mayes, S. D., Calhoun, S. L. & Waschbusch, D. A. Relationship between sluggish cognitive tempo and sleep, psychological, somatic, and cognitive problems and impairment in children with autism and children with ADHD. Clin. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 26 , 518–530 (2021).

Reinvall, O. et al. Sluggish cognitive tempo in children and adolescents with higher functioning autism spectrum disorders: social impairments and internalizing symptoms. Scand. J. Psychol. 58 , 389–399 (2017).

Mueller, A. K. et al. Sluggish cognitive tempo and its neurocognitive, social and emotive correlates: a systematic review of the current literature. J. Mol. Psychiat. 2 , 5 (2014).

Tamm, L. et al. Neurocognition in children with cognitive disengagement syndrome: accurate but slow. Child. Neuropsychol. 30 , 221–240 (2024).

Stark, R. & Mandl, H. Bridging the gap between basic and applied research by an integrative research approach. Educ. Res. Eval. 13 , 249–261 (2007).

Munro, C. L. & Savel, R. H. Narrowing the 17-year research to practice gap. Am. J. Crit. Care 25 , 194–196 (2016).

Mallonee, S., Fowler, C. & Istre, G. R. Bridging the gap between research and practice: a continuing challenge. Inj. Prev. 12 , 357–359 (2006).

American Educational Research Association (AERA), American Psychological Association (APA) & National Council on Measurement in Education. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA, 2014).

Kane, M. J. & Engle, R. W. Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: the contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 132 , 47–70 (2003).

Hicks, K. L., Foster, J. L. & Engle, R. W. Measuring working memory capacity on the web with the online working memory lab (the OWL). J. Appl. Res. Mem. Cogn. 5 , 478–489 (2016).

Normand, S. & Tannock, R. Screening for working memory deficits in the classroom: the psychometric properties of the working memory rating scale in a longitudinal school-based study. J. Atten. Disord. 18 , 294–304 (2014).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA

Michael J. Kofler, Leah J. Singh & Sherelle L. Harmon

Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

Elia F. Soto

Department of Psychology, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA

Emma M. Jaisle, Jessica N. Smith & Kathleen E. Feeney

Department of Psychology, Barnard College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

Erica D. Musser

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors researched data for the article and contributed substantially to the discussion of the content. M.J.K., E.F.S., L.J.S., S.L.H, E.M.J., J.N.S., K.E.F. and E.D.M. wrote the article and reviewed and/or edited the manuscript before submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Kofler .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature Reviews Psychology thanks Alisha Pollastri, Russel Schachar and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information, rights and permissions.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Kofler, M.J., Soto, E.F., Singh, L.J. et al. Executive function deficits in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder. Nat Rev Psychol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00350-9

Download citation

Accepted : 23 July 2024

Published : 29 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00350-9

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.