research hypothesis ipad acronym

• 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

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

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

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

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

Research Hypothesis 101

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

What is a hypothesis?

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

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

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

Hypothesis: sleep impacts academic performance.

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

But that’s not good enough…

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

What is a research hypothesis?

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

Let’s take a look at these more closely.

Need a helping hand?

Hypothesis Essential #1: Specificity & Clarity

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

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

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

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

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

Hypothesis Essential #2: Testability (Provability)

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

For example, consider the hypothesis we mentioned earlier:

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

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

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

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

Defining A Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

What about the null hypothesis?

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

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

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

And there you have it – hypotheses in a nutshell. 

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

Psst… there’s more (for free)

This post is part of our dissertation mini-course, which covers everything you need to get started with your dissertation, thesis or research project. 

You Might Also Like:

15 Comments

Very useful information. I benefit more from getting more information in this regard.

Very great insight,educative and informative. Please give meet deep critics on many research data of public international Law like human rights, environment, natural resources, law of the sea etc

In a book I read a distinction is made between null, research, and alternative hypothesis. As far as I understand, alternative and research hypotheses are the same. Can you please elaborate? Best Afshin

This is a self explanatory, easy going site. I will recommend this to my friends and colleagues.

Very good definition. How can I cite your definition in my thesis? Thank you. Is nul hypothesis compulsory in a research?

It’s a counter-proposal to be proven as a rejection

Please what is the difference between alternate hypothesis and research hypothesis?

It is a very good explanation. However, it limits hypotheses to statistically tasteable ideas. What about for qualitative researches or other researches that involve quantitative data that don’t need statistical tests?

In qualitative research, one typically uses propositions, not hypotheses.

could you please elaborate it more

I’ve benefited greatly from these notes, thank you.

This is very helpful

well articulated ideas are presented here, thank you for being reliable sources of information

Excellent. Thanks for being clear and sound about the research methodology and hypothesis (quantitative research)

I have only a simple question regarding the null hypothesis. – Is the null hypothesis (Ho) known as the reversible hypothesis of the alternative hypothesis (H1? – How to test it in academic research?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

• What Is Research Methodology? Simple Definition (With Examples) - Grad Coach - […] Contrasted to this, a quantitative methodology is typically used when the research aims and objectives are confirmatory in nature. For example,…

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

Ohio State nav bar

The Ohio State University

• BuckeyeLink
• Find People
• Search Ohio State

Research Questions & Hypotheses

Generally, in quantitative studies, reviewers expect hypotheses rather than research questions. However, both research questions and hypotheses serve different purposes and can be beneficial when used together.

Research Questions

Clarify the research’s aim (farrugia et al., 2010).

• Research often begins with an interest in a topic, but a deep understanding of the subject is crucial to formulate an appropriate research question.
• Descriptive: “What factors most influence the academic achievement of senior high school students?”
• Comparative: “What is the performance difference between teaching methods A and B?”
• Relationship-based: “What is the relationship between self-efficacy and academic achievement?”
• Increasing knowledge about a subject can be achieved through systematic literature reviews, in-depth interviews with patients (and proxies), focus groups, and consultations with field experts.
• Some funding bodies, like the Canadian Institute for Health Research, recommend conducting a systematic review or a pilot study before seeking grants for full trials.
• The presence of multiple research questions in a study can complicate the design, statistical analysis, and feasibility.
• It’s advisable to focus on a single primary research question for the study.
• The primary question, clearly stated at the end of a grant proposal’s introduction, usually specifies the study population, intervention, and other relevant factors.
• The FINER criteria underscore aspects that can enhance the chances of a successful research project, including specifying the population of interest, aligning with scientific and public interest, clinical relevance, and contribution to the field, while complying with ethical and national research standards.
• The P ICOT approach is crucial in developing the study’s framework and protocol, influencing inclusion and exclusion criteria and identifying patient groups for inclusion.
• Defining the specific population, intervention, comparator, and outcome helps in selecting the right outcome measurement tool.
• The more precise the population definition and stricter the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the more significant the impact on the interpretation, applicability, and generalizability of the research findings.
• A restricted study population enhances internal validity but may limit the study’s external validity and generalizability to clinical practice.
• A broadly defined study population may better reflect clinical practice but could increase bias and reduce internal validity.
• An inadequately formulated research question can negatively impact study design, potentially leading to ineffective outcomes and affecting publication prospects.

Checklist: Good research questions for social science projects (Panke, 2018)

Research Hypotheses

Present the researcher’s predictions based on specific statements.

• These statements define the research problem or issue and indicate the direction of the researcher’s predictions.
• Formulating the research question and hypothesis from existing data (e.g., a database) can lead to multiple statistical comparisons and potentially spurious findings due to chance.
• The research or clinical hypothesis, derived from the research question, shapes the study’s key elements: sampling strategy, intervention, comparison, and outcome variables.
• Hypotheses can express a single outcome or multiple outcomes.
• After statistical testing, the null hypothesis is either rejected or not rejected based on whether the study’s findings are statistically significant.
• Hypothesis testing helps determine if observed findings are due to true differences and not chance.
• Hypotheses can be 1-sided (specific direction of difference) or 2-sided (presence of a difference without specifying direction).
• 2-sided hypotheses are generally preferred unless there’s a strong justification for a 1-sided hypothesis.
• A solid research hypothesis, informed by a good research question, influences the research design and paves the way for defining clear research objectives.

Types of Research Hypothesis

• In a Y-centered research design, the focus is on the dependent variable (DV) which is specified in the research question. Theories are then used to identify independent variables (IV) and explain their causal relationship with the DV.
• Example: “An increase in teacher-led instructional time (IV) is likely to improve student reading comprehension scores (DV), because extensive guided practice under expert supervision enhances learning retention and skill mastery.”
• Hypothesis Explanation: The dependent variable (student reading comprehension scores) is the focus, and the hypothesis explores how changes in the independent variable (teacher-led instructional time) affect it.
• In X-centered research designs, the independent variable is specified in the research question. Theories are used to determine potential dependent variables and the causal mechanisms at play.
• Example: “Implementing technology-based learning tools (IV) is likely to enhance student engagement in the classroom (DV), because interactive and multimedia content increases student interest and participation.”
• Hypothesis Explanation: The independent variable (technology-based learning tools) is the focus, with the hypothesis exploring its impact on a potential dependent variable (student engagement).
• Probabilistic hypotheses suggest that changes in the independent variable are likely to lead to changes in the dependent variable in a predictable manner, but not with absolute certainty.
• Example: “The more teachers engage in professional development programs (IV), the more their teaching effectiveness (DV) is likely to improve, because continuous training updates pedagogical skills and knowledge.”
• Hypothesis Explanation: This hypothesis implies a probable relationship between the extent of professional development (IV) and teaching effectiveness (DV).
• Deterministic hypotheses state that a specific change in the independent variable will lead to a specific change in the dependent variable, implying a more direct and certain relationship.
• Example: “If the school curriculum changes from traditional lecture-based methods to project-based learning (IV), then student collaboration skills (DV) are expected to improve because project-based learning inherently requires teamwork and peer interaction.”
• Hypothesis Explanation: This hypothesis presumes a direct and definite outcome (improvement in collaboration skills) resulting from a specific change in the teaching method.
• Example : “Students who identify as visual learners will score higher on tests that are presented in a visually rich format compared to tests presented in a text-only format.”
• Explanation : This hypothesis aims to describe the potential difference in test scores between visual learners taking visually rich tests and text-only tests, without implying a direct cause-and-effect relationship.
• Example : “Teaching method A will improve student performance more than method B.”
• Explanation : This hypothesis compares the effectiveness of two different teaching methods, suggesting that one will lead to better student performance than the other. It implies a direct comparison but does not necessarily establish a causal mechanism.
• Example : “Students with higher self-efficacy will show higher levels of academic achievement.”
• Explanation : This hypothesis predicts a relationship between the variable of self-efficacy and academic achievement. Unlike a causal hypothesis, it does not necessarily suggest that one variable causes changes in the other, but rather that they are related in some way.

Tips for developing research questions and hypotheses 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.
• Ensure that the research question and objectives are answerable, feasible, and clinically relevant.

If your research hypotheses are derived from your research questions, particularly when multiple hypotheses address a single question, it’s recommended to use both research questions and hypotheses. However, if this isn’t the case, using hypotheses over research questions is advised. It’s important to note these are general guidelines, not strict rules. If you opt not to use hypotheses, consult with your supervisor for the best approach.

Farrugia, P., Petrisor, B. A., Farrokhyar, F., & Bhandari, M. (2010). Practical tips for surgical research: Research questions, hypotheses and objectives.  Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie ,  53 (4), 278–281.

Hulley, S. B., Cummings, S. R., Browner, W. S., Grady, D., & Newman, T. B. (2007). Designing clinical research. Philadelphia.

Panke, D. (2018). Research design & method selection: Making good choices in the social sciences.  Research Design & Method Selection , 1-368.

Advertisement

Does iPad use support learning in students aged 9–14 years? A systematic review

• Published: 03 July 2020
• Volume 48 , pages 525–541, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Helen J. Boon   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3842-9622 1 ,
• Lucy Boon 1 &
• Toby Bartle 2  

2841 Accesses

5 Citations

35 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This systematic literature review sought to examine whether iPad or other mobile technology use by school students aged 9 to 14 years enhanced academic outcomes. Conducted in March 2019 using the PRISMA statement, the review identified 43 studies published between 2010 and 2019 which specifically addressed the research question. Findings revealed that iPad use for specific school learning areas such as mathematics, English, science, and the like has not consistently enhanced academic outcomes. Some reviewed papers also indicated that teachers were not always employing the technology most effectively. To defend the current extensive classroom use of mobile technology such as iPads, further research employing within-subject designs must be conducted. Such research must assess the efficacy of iPad use for attaining specific content area outcomes against pedagogies which utilise paper reading, handwriting and/or other manipulations of teaching materials. Moreover, teacher professional learning needs to be provided so that when teachers use iPads in classrooms they are able to deploy them in the most appropriate way.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The impact of smartphone use on learning effectiveness: A case study of primary school students

Jen Chun Wang, Chia-Yen Hsieh & Shih-Hao Kung

Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools' digital capacity and transformation: A literature review

Stella Timotheou, Ourania Miliou, … Andri Ioannou

Adoption of online mathematics learning in Ugandan government universities during the COVID-19 pandemic: pre-service teachers’ behavioural intention and challenges

Geofrey Kansiime & Marjorie Sarah Kabuye Batiibwe

ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). (2011). Household Internet and computer access . Retrieved from https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Previousproducts/4E4D83E02F39FC32CA25796600152BF4?opendocument .

Arthanat, S., Curtin, C., & Kontak, D. (2015). An evaluation protocol for selection of educational technologies for students with developmental disabilities: A demonstration study using iPad apps. Journal of Occupational Therapy, Schools & Early Intervention, 8 (3), 236–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/19411243.2015.1077771 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Axford, C., Joosten, A. V., & Harris, C. (2018). iPad applications that required a range of motor skills promoted motor coordination in children commencing primary school. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 65 (2), 146–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/1440-1630.12450 .

Beal, C. R., & Rosenblum, L. P. (2018). Evaluation of the effectiveness of a tablet computer application (App) in helping students with visual impairments solve mathematics problems. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 112 (1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1811200102 .

Bergeson, K., & Rosheim, K. (2018). Literacy, equity, and the employment of iPads in the classroom: A comparison of secure and developing readers. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 6 (2), 173–181. https://ijemst.net/index.php/ijemst/article/view/196 .

Biggs, E. E., Carter, E. W., & Gustafson, J. (2017). Efficacy of peer support arrangements to increase peer interaction and AAC use. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 122 (1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-122.1.25 .

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2011). Introduction to meta-analysis . New York: Wiley.

Google Scholar  

Browder, D., Root, J., & Wood, L. (2017). Effects of a story-mapping procedure using the iPad on the comprehension of narrative texts by students with autism spectrum disorder. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 32 (4), 243–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357615611387 .

Bruhn, A. L., Vogelgesang, K., Fernando, J., & Lugo, W. (2016). Using data to individualize a multicomponent, technology-based self-monitoring intervention. Journal of Special Education Technology, 31 (2), 64–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643416650024 .

Bryant, B. R., Ok, M., Kang, E. Y., Kim, M. K., Lang, R., Bryant, D. P., et al. (2015). Performance of fourth-grade students with learning disabilities on multiplication facts comparing teacher-mediated and technology-mediated interventions: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24 (2), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-015-9218-z .

Cameron, C. E., Cottone, E. A., Murrah, W. M., & Grissmer, D. W. (2016). How are motor skills linked to children’s school performance and academic achievement? Child Development Perspectives, 10 (2), 93–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12168 .

Cardullo, V., Zygouris-Coe, V., & Wilson, N. S. (2017). Reading nonfiction text on an iPad in a secondary classroom. Journal of Research in Reading, 40 (1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12099 .

Carr, J. M. (2012). Does math achievement "h'APP'en" when iPads and game-based learning are incorporated into fifth-grade mathematics instruction? Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11 (1), 269–286. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/111505/ .

Cartier, L. C. (2014). The flexible learning lab. Knowledge Quest, 42 (4), 58–63. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1041598 .

Chambers, D., Jones, P., McGhie-Richmond, D., Riley, M., May-Poole, S., Orlando, A. M., et al. (2018). An exploration of teacher's use of iPads for students with learning support needs. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 18 (2), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12394 .

Chen, C. W. J. (2015). Mobile learning: Using application Aural book to learn aural skills. International Journal of Music Education, 33 (2), 244–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761414533308 .

Child Trends Databank. (2013). Home computer access and Internet use . Retrieved January 15, 2015 from https://www.childtrends.org/databank/indicators-by-life-stage/infants-young-children/page/3/ .

Churches, A., & Dickens, H. (2012). Apps for Learning: 40 Best iPad, iPod Touch, iPhone apps for high school classrooms. Churches, A. & Dickens, H. (2011) Apps for Learning: 40 Best iPad, iPod Touch, iPhone Apps for High School Classrooms. Vancouver, BC: CreateSpace. Ed. Vancouver: 21st Century Fluency Project Inc.

Ditzler, C., Hong, E., & Strudler, N. (2016). How tablets are utilized in the classroom. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48 (3), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2016.1172444 .

Douglas, K. H., Uphold, N. M., Steffen, S., & Kroesch, A. M. (2018). Promoting literacy with self-created grocery lists on mobile devices. Journal of Special Education, 51 (4), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466917719260 .

Emanuel, J. (2013). Digital native librarians, technology skills, and their relationship with technology. Information Technology and Libraries, 32 (3), 20–33. https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v32i3.3811 .

Falloon, G. (2017). Mobile devices and apps as scaffolds to science learning in the primary classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26 (6), 613–628. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-017-9702-4 .

Felix, V. G., Mena, L. J., Ostos, R., & Maestre, G. E. (2017). A pilot study of the use of emerging computer technologies to improve the effectiveness of reading and writing therapies in children with Down syndrome. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48 (2), 611–624. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12426 .

Ferguson, J. M., & Oigara, J. N. (2017). iPads in the Classroom: What do teachers think? International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 13 (4), 74–86. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJICTE.2017100106 .

Flewitt, R., Messer, D., & Kucirkova, N. (2015). New directions for early literacy in a digital age: The iPad. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 15 (3), 289–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798414533560 .

Flores, M., Musgrove, K., Renner, S., Hinton, V., Strozier, S., Franklin, S., et al. (2012). A comparison of communication using the Apple iPad and a picture-based system. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 28 (2), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2011.644579 .

Flynn, J. R., & Shayer, M. (2018). IQ decline and Piaget: Does the rot start at the top? Intelligence, 66 , 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2017.11.010 .

Frangou, S., Ruokamo, H., Parviainen, T., & Wikgren, J. (2018). Can you put your finger on it? The effects of writing modality on Finnish students' recollection. Writing Systems Research, 10 (2), 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/17586801.2018.1536015 .

Grissmer, D. W., Grimm, K. J., Aiyer, S. M., Murrah, W. M., & Steele, J. S. (2010). Fine motor skills and early comprehension of the world: Two new school readiness indicators. Developmental Psychology, 46 (5), 1008–1017. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020104.supp .

Hill, D. A., & Flores, M. M. (2014). Comparing the picture exchange communication system and the iPad(TM) for communication of students with autism spectrum disorder and developmental delay. TechTrends, 58 (3), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0751-8 .

Hilton, A. (2018). Engaging primary school students in mathematics: Can iPads make a difference? International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16 (1), 145–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9771-5 .

Holmes, J. M., Manh, V. M., Lazar, E. L., Beck, R. W., Birch, E. E., Kraker, R. T., et al. (2016). Effect of a binocular iPad game vs part-time patching in children aged 5 to 12 years with amblyopia: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmology, 134 (12), 1391–1400. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.4262 .

Hong, J.-C., Hwang, M.-Y., Tai, K.-H., & Tsai, C.-R. (2017). An exploration of students' science learning interest related to their cognitive anxiety, cognitive load, self-confidence and learning progress using inquiry-based learning with an iPad. Research in Science Education, 47 (6), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9541-y .

Huang, Y.-M., Liang, T.-H., Su, Y.-N., & Chen, N.-S. (2012). Empowering personalized learning with an interactive e-book learning system for elementary school students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60 (4), 703–722. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9237-6 .

Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, J., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2011). The Horizon report . Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.

Knight, K., & Davies, R. (2016). Using a mobile dichotomous key iPad application as a scaffolding tool in a museum setting. Interactive Learning Environments, 24 (4), 814–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.924532 .

Kwan, A., Chu, S., Hong, A., Tam, F., Lee, G., & Mellecker, R. (2015). Making smart choices: A serious game for sex education for young adolescents. Games for Health Journal: Research, Development, and Clinical Applications, 4 (3), 168–174. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijgbl.2015010102 .

Lenhard, W., Schroeders, U., & Lenhard, A. (2017). Equivalence of screen versus print reading comprehension depends on task complexity and proficiency. Discourse Processes, 54 (5–6), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2017.1319653 .

Li, Y., & Wang, L. (2018). Using iPad-based mobile learning to teach creative engineering within a problem-based learning pedagogy. Education and Information Technologies, 23 (1), 555–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9617-y .

Lin, L.-Y., Cherng, R.-J., & Chen, Y.-J. (2017). Effect of touch screen tablet use on fine motor development of young children. Physical & Occupational Therapy In Pediatrics, 37 (5), 457–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2016.1255290 .

Longcamp, M., Anton, J.-L., Roth, M., & Velay, J.-L. (2005). Premotor activations in response to visually presented single letters depend on the hand used to write: A study on left-handers. Neuropsychologia, 43 (12), 1801–1809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia2005.01.020 .

Longcamp, M., Boucard, C., Gilhodes, J.-C., Anton, J.-L., Roth, M., Nazarian, B., et al. (2008). Learning through hand- or typewriting influences visual recognition of new graphic shapes: Behavioral and functional imaging evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20 (5), 802–815. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20504 .

Mangen, A., & Velay, J. L. (2010). Digitizing literacy: Reflections on the haptics of writing. In M. H. Zadeh (Ed.), Advances in haptics (pp. 385–401). Rijeka, Croatia: InTech.

Marr, D., Cermak, S., Cohn, E. S., & Henderson, A. (2003). Fine motor activities in head start and kindergarten classrooms. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 57 , 550–557. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot/57.7.550 .

McKeown, D., Kimball, K., & Ledford, J. R. (2015). Effects of asynchronous audio feedback on the story revision practices of students with emotional/ behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 38 (4), 541–564. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2015.0020 .

McClelland, M. M., & Cameron, C. E. (2019). Developing together: The role of executive function and motor skills in children’s early academic lives. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 46 , 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.03.014 .

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of internal medicine, 151 (4), 264–269. https://annals.org/aim/article-abstract/744664 .

Molnár, G. (2013). New learning spaces? M-learning's, in particular the iPad’s potentials in education. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 7 (1), 56–60. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/6402204 .

Monem, R., Bennett, K. D., & Barbetta, P. M. (2018). The Effects of Low-Tech and High-Tech Active Student Responding Strategies during History Instruction for Students with SLD. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 16 (1), 87–106. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1179954 .

Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science, 25 (6), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581 .

Murray, O., & Olcese, N. (2011). Teaching and learning with iPads, Ready Or Not? TechTrends Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 55 (6), 42–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-011-0540-6 .

Najmuldeen, H. A. (2017). The impact of educational games-based ipad applications on the development of social studies achievement and learning retention among sixth grade students in Jeddah. World Journal of Education, 7 (3), 21–40. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1157653 .

Nguyen, L., Barton, S. M., & Nguyen, L. T. (2014). iPads in higher education—Hype and hope. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46 (1), 190–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12137 .

Ockert, D. M. (2014). The influence of technology in the classroom: An analysis of an iPad and video intervention on JHS students' confidence, anxiety, and FL WTC. JALT CALL Journal, 10(1), 49–68. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1107915 .

Ok, M., & Bryant, D. (2016). Effects of a strategic intervention with iPad practice on the multiplication fact performance of fifth-grade students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 39 (3), 146–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948715598285 .

Pagani, L. S., & Messier, S. (2012). Links between motor skills and indicators of school readiness at kindergarten entry in urban disadvantaged children. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 2 (1), 95–107. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v2n1p95k .

Patterson, L., & Young, A. (2013). The power of math dictionaries in the classroom. SRATE Journal, 22 (2), 22–28. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1015817 .

Perry, D., & Steck, A. (2015). Increasing student engagement, self-efficacy, and meta-cognitive self-regulation in the high school geometry classroom: Do iPads help? Computers in the Schools, 32 (2), 122–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2015.1036650 .

Pifarré, M. (2019). Using interactive technologies to promote a dialogic space for creating collaboratively: A study in secondary education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 32 , 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.01.004 .

Prince, J. (2017). English language learners in a digital classroom. CATESOL Journal, 29 (1), 51–73. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1144336 .

Regan, K., Evmenova, A. S., Good, K., Legget, A., Ahn, S. Y., Gafurov, B., et al. (2018). Persuasive writing with mobile-based graphic organizers in inclusive classrooms across the curriculum. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33 (1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417727292 .

Rivera, C. J., Hudson, M. E., Weiss, S. L., & Zambone, A. (2017). Using a multicomponent multimedia shared story intervention with an iPad to teach content picture vocabulary to students with developmental disabilities. Education & Treatment of Children, 40 (3), 327–352. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2017.0014 .

Saarinen, A., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2016). The functions and benefits of the eportfolio in craft education at the primary level. Design and Technology Education, 21 (3), 29–40. https://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/DATE/article/download/2156/2338 .

Sankardas, S. A., & Rajanahally, J. (2017). iPad: efficacy of electronic devices to help children with autism spectrum disorder to communicate in the classroom. Support for Learning, 32 (2), 144–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9604.12160 .

Santori, D., & Smith, C. (2018). Teaching and learning with iPads to support dialogic construction of multiliteracies. Middle School Journal, 49 (1), 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2018.1398944 .

Singer, L. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2017). Reading on paper and digitally: What the past decades of empirical research reveal. Review of Educational Research, 87 (6), 1007–1041. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317722961 .

Smith, C., & Santori, D. (2015). An exploration of iPad-based teaching and learning: How middle-grades teachers and students are realizing the potential. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 47 (3), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2015.1047700 .

Son, S.-H., & Meisels, S. J. (2006). The relationship of young children’s motor skills to later reading and math achievement. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly: Journal of Developmental Psychology, 52 (4), 755–778. www.jstor.org/stable/23096032 .

Thompson, P. (2015). How digital native learners describe themselves. Education and Information Technologies, 20 (3), 467–484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9295-3 .

van der Fels, I. M. J., te Wierike, S. C. M., Hartman, E., Elferink-Gemser, M. T., Smith, J., & Visscher, C. (2015). The relationship between motor skills and cognitive skills in 4–16 year old typically developing children: A systematic review. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 18 (6), 697–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2014.09.007 .

Venetsanou, F., & Kambas, A. (2010). Environmental factors affecting pre-schoolers’ motor development. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37 , 319–327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-009-0350-z .

Vogelgesang, K. L., Bruhn, A. L., Coghill-Behrends, W. L., Kern, A. M., & Troughton, L. C. (2016). A single-subject study of a technology-based self-monitoring intervention. Journal of Behavioral Education, 25 (4), 478–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-016-9253-4 .

Ward, N. D., Finley, R. J., Keil, R. G., & Clay, T. G. (2013). Benefits and limitations of iPads in the high school science classroom and a trophic cascade lesson plan. Journal of Geoscience Education, 61 (4), 378–384. https://doi.org/10.5408/13-008.1 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Arts, Society and Education, James Cook University, Townsville, Qld, 4811, Australia

Helen J. Boon & Lucy Boon

James Cook University, College of Arts, Society and Education, Cairns, QLD, 4870, Australia

Toby Bartle

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helen J. Boon .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 35 kb)

Supplementary file2 (docx 70 kb), rights and permissions.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Boon, H.J., Boon, L. & Bartle, T. Does iPad use support learning in students aged 9–14 years? A systematic review. Aust. Educ. Res. 48 , 525–541 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-020-00400-0

Download citation

Received : 20 February 2020

Accepted : 17 June 2020

Published : 03 July 2020

Issue Date : July 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-020-00400-0

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

• Mobile technology
• Academic achievement
• Primary schools
• Secondary education
• Educational development
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
• Guides & Tutorials

Systematic Search for Systematic Review

• Formulate Research Question Using PICO
• Introduction
• Find Systematic Reviews (SR)
• Databases Selection for Conducting SR
• Step 1. Set Preferences in EndNote
• Step 2. Create Groups in EndNote
• Step 3. Export Search Results from Databases to EndNote
• Step 4. Add Name of Database to References
• Step 5. Remove Duplicate Records
• Step 6. Share References with Teammates
• Step 7. Find Full Text Articles
• [Optional] Export References to Excel

Worksheets for Documenting & Reporting Search Process

Here are some resources for you to document and report your search process in a systematic review. 

• Workbook for documenting systematic search
• PRISMA Flow Diagram A flow diagram to depict the flow of information through the different phases of a systematic review. It maps out the number of records identified, included and excluded, and the reasons for exclusions.

Understanding SR

• What are systematic reviews? (Cochrane)
• Intro to Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses
• Using PICO to formulate a search question   (CEBM)
• Turning search terms into a search   (CEBM)
• Turning your search strategy into results: PubMed demonstration   (CEBM)

Understanding study design

• What is a randomised trial?
• Epidemiology Study Types: Randomized Control Trial
• Epidemiology Study Types: Cohort and Case-Control
• Cohort, Case-Control, Meta-Analysis, Cross-sectional Study Designs & Definition 

Copyright Disclaimer

Except where otherwise noted, the content of this guide is licensed under a  CC BY-NC 4.0 License .

A systematic review aims to answer a specific research (clinical) question. A well-formulated question will guide many aspects of the review process, including determining eligibility criteria, searching for studies, collecting data from included studies, and presenting findings ( Cochrane Handbook , Sec. 5.1.1).

To define a  researchable  question, the most commonly used structure is  PICO , which specifies the type of P atient or P opulation, type of I nterventions (and C omparisons if there is any), and the type of O utcomes that are of interest. 

The table below gives an example on how a research question is framed using the PICO structure. You may also use the PICO components to write the objective and title of your review, and later to structure your inclusion and exclusion criteria for study selection. This ensures that the whole review process is guided by your research question. 

Type of Question and Study Design

While formulating your research question, it's also important to consider the  type of question  you are asking because this will affect the type of studies (or study design ) to be included in your review.

Each type of question defines its type of studies in order to provide the best evidence. For example, to answer a therapeutic question, you need to include as many Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) as possible, because RCTs are considered to have the highest  level of evidence  (least bias) for solving a therapeutic problem. 

The table below suggests the best designs for specific type of question. The Level of Evidence pyramid, which is widely adopted in the medical research area, shows a hierarchy of the quality of medical research evidence in different type of studies ( Level of Evidence (2011), Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine, CEBM ).

Usually, the study design of a research work will be clearly indicated either in its title or abstract, especially for RCT. Some databases also allow to search or refine results to one or a few study designs, which helps you locate as many as possible the relevant studies. If you are not sure the study design of a research work, refer to this brief guide for spotting study designs  (by CEBM).

Learn to Build a Good Clinical Question

Learn to build a good clinical question  from this  EBP Tutorial: Module 1:  "Introduction to Evidence-Based Practice"

It is provided by Duke University and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA.

PICO Framework and the Question Statement The above named section  in the Library guide:  Evidence-Based Practice in Health , provided by the University of Canberra Library, explains the PICO framework with examples and in various question types.

Documenting Your Search Process

Systematic review requires a detailed and structured reporting of the search strategy and selection criteria used in the review. Therefore we strongly advise you to document your search process from the very beginning. You may use this workbook  to help you with the documentation.

The documentation should include:

• Research concepts in PICO structure and research question ,
• Type of studies you intend to include, and
• Inclusion and exclusion criteria in PICO structure

and the whole search process, including:

• Databases searched (hosting platforms) , including journals and other sources covered in handsearching
• Date of search
• Search strategy , including keywords and subject headings used, the combination of searches (usually copy-paste from database search page)
• Filters used in initial search or refine results, including year coverage, type of studies, age, etc.
• Number of results retrieved after each search and refinement in each database
• Total number of results from all databases searched
• Duplicates identified from all results
• Number of results with full text

Eventually, you will need to include the information above when you start writing your review. A highly recommended structure for reporting the search process is the PRISMA Flow Diagram . You may also use PRISMA Flow Diagram Generator to generate a diagram in a different format (based on your input). 

• << Previous: Find Systematic Reviews (SR)
• Next: Databases Selection for Conducting SR >>
• Last Updated: Oct 30, 2023 10:57 AM
• URL: https://libguides.lb.polyu.edu.hk/syst_review

• Library Search
• View Library Account
• The Claremont Colleges Library
• Research Guides

Open Educational Resources (OERs)

• hypothes.is
• What Are OER?
• Where to Start
• Evaluate OER
• Additional Resources
• FAQs for Open Educational Resources (OER)
• Open Pedagogy

Using the Hypothesis Sakai: Importing from Public Files (URL) and Google

Using the Hypothesis Sakai: Importing from BOX

• Open Publishing with Pressbooks

hypothes.is is a handy web-based annotation tool used to annotate text on websites and documents. It gives the user the ability to highlight and create notes for private or public use as well as create private groups for collaborations.

Tips for Setting Up and Using hypothes.is at Claremont:

Using the Hypothesis LMS App with Lessons in Sakai  (requires an institutional agreement) Using the Hypothesis Sakai: Importing from Public Files (URL) and Google Using the Hypothesis Sakai: Importing from BOX Installing the Bookmarklet (free)

hypothes.is can be used as a tool for annotation, helping students learn to read academic works, and for reading collaboratively. In open education, hypothes.is creates a richer and more inclusive environment, it allows for alternative voices, and creates a frame work for open dialogue. hypothes.is used in your online teaching can also help you rethink how you engage students as producers and creators of knowledge .

Examples of Pedagogy and Assignments:

• Annotation as Sustained Reading Practice
• Annotation as a Reading “Action”  (Brian Watkins, Austin College)
• Primary Source Annotation  (Jeff McClurken, University of Mary Washington)
• Curate a Novel Chapter  (Tony Fassi, St. Stephen’s Episcopal School)
• Adopt a Poem  (Elisa Beshero-Bondar, University of Pittsburgh-Greensberg)
• Scholarly Article Annotation  (Karin Akre, Hunter College)
• Create an Annotated Class Anthology
• Annotation as Questions and Answers  (Matthew Roberts, Grand Valley State)
• Annotation as Research and Pre-writing (Sean Hackney, Joliet Township High School)

* information provided adapted from https://web.hypothes.is

* adapted from  https://web.hypothes.is/help/using-the-hypothesis-lms-app-with-lessons-in-sakai/

Selecting a Document for Annotation

You will have the option to enter a publicly-viewable URL (See Step A ) or to add a PDF from Google Drive (See Step B ). The screen will look like this:

Step A:  Add a publicly-viewable URL:

On the “Link Resource from External Tool” screen, paste a link in the text box. Please note that the content at the link must be publicly viewable (i.e., not behind a login or paywall). Here we’ve chosen a Wikipedia article, but you can link to blog posts, open-access books, journal and news articles, HTML pages, etc.

Click  Submit.

Step B: Select a PDF from Google Drive

Note: This process will change the privacy of the selected Google Drive file to “Anyone with the link can view,” creating a publicly-viewable URL for the document. However, the document URL will not be shared with anyone outside your course and cannot be easily discovered.

On the Link Resource from External Tool screen, click select PDF from Google Drive

You will be asked to authorize a Google account, and then you’ll be able to search for and select a file, or upload a new one. Click on the file you want to use and then click  Select.

You will be brought back to the “Link Resource from External Tool” screen, where you’ll see a Google Drive URL in the text box. Click  Submit .

Selecting a Document for Annotation from BOX

You can add documents from BOX as if you were adding a publicly-viewable URL. 

On the “Link Resource from External Tool” screen, you will paste a link in the text box. * Please note that the content at the link must be publicly viewable (i.e., not behind a login or paywall).

For BOX you must chose the DIRECT Link. To find the direct link follow these steps.

1. View the document you would like to view in your BOX.  Select "Create and Copy Shared Link" 

2. Select "Link Settings"  and ensure that People with the link " Can view and Download"

3. Copy the DIRECT link

Enter the DIRECT link into the hypothes.is URL field:

• << Previous: Open Pedagogy
• Next: Open Publishing with Pressbooks >>
• : Feb 5, 2024 4:40 PM
• URL: https://libguides.libraries.claremont.edu/openedresources

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.

• Knowledge Base

How to Use Hypothesis on Mobile Devices

Ask a question, knowledge base categories.

• Using Hypothesis in the LMS
• Top Articles
• Publisher Partners
• Learning Management Systems
• Installing in the LMS
• Hypothesis in the Public Web
• D2L Brightspace
• Annotating with Hypothesis