introduction to hypothesis in research

• 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)

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

Join Us for Peer Review Week 2024

How Editage All Access is Boosting Productivity for Academics in India

• 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."

What Is A Research (Scientific) Hypothesis?

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:

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.

Learn More About Methodology

Triangulation: The Ultimate Credibility Enhancer

Triangulation is one of the best ways to enhance the credibility of your research. Learn about the different options here.

Research Limitations 101: What You Need To Know

Learn everything you need to know about research limitations (AKA limitations of the study). Includes practical examples from real studies.

In Vivo Coding 101: Full Explainer With Examples

Learn about in vivo coding, a popular qualitative coding technique ideal for studies where the nuances of language are central to the aims.

Process Coding 101: Full Explainer With Examples

Learn about process coding, a popular qualitative coding technique ideal for studies exploring processes, actions and changes over time.

Qualitative Coding 101: Inductive, Deductive & Hybrid Coding

Inductive, Deductive & Abductive Coding Qualitative Coding Approaches Explained...

📄 FREE TEMPLATES

Research Topic Ideation

Proposal Writing

Literature Review

Methodology & Analysis

Academic Writing

Referencing & Citing

Apps, Tools & Tricks

The Grad Coach Podcast

17 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?

this is very important note help me much more

Hi” best wishes to you and your very nice blog” 

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.

Submit Comment

• Print Friendly

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 16 September 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.

How to Write a Hypothesis: A Step-by-Step Guide

Introduction

An overview of the research hypothesis, different types of hypotheses, variables in a hypothesis, how to formulate an effective research hypothesis, designing a study around your hypothesis.

The scientific method can derive and test predictions as hypotheses. Empirical research can then provide support (or lack thereof) for the hypotheses. Even failure to find support for a hypothesis still represents a valuable contribution to scientific knowledge. Let's look more closely at the idea of the hypothesis and the role it plays in research.

As much as the term exists in everyday language, there is a detailed development that informs the word "hypothesis" when applied to research. A good research hypothesis is informed by prior research and guides research design and data analysis , so it is important to understand how a hypothesis is defined and understood by researchers.

What is the simple definition of a hypothesis?

A hypothesis is a testable prediction about an outcome between two or more variables . It functions as a navigational tool in the research process, directing what you aim to predict and how.

What is the hypothesis for in research?

In research, a hypothesis serves as the cornerstone for your empirical study. It not only lays out what you aim to investigate but also provides a structured approach for your data collection and analysis.

Essentially, it bridges the gap between the theoretical and the empirical, guiding your investigation throughout its course.

What is an example of a hypothesis?

If you are studying the relationship between physical exercise and mental health, a suitable hypothesis could be: "Regular physical exercise leads to improved mental well-being among adults."

This statement constitutes a specific and testable hypothesis that directly relates to the variables you are investigating.

What makes a good hypothesis?

A good hypothesis possesses several key characteristics. Firstly, it must be testable, allowing you to analyze data through empirical means, such as observation or experimentation, to assess if there is significant support for the hypothesis. Secondly, a hypothesis should be specific and unambiguous, giving a clear understanding of the expected relationship between variables. Lastly, it should be grounded in existing research or theoretical frameworks , ensuring its relevance and applicability.

Understanding the types of hypotheses can greatly enhance how you construct and work with hypotheses. While all hypotheses serve the essential function of guiding your study, there are varying purposes among the types of hypotheses. In addition, all hypotheses stand in contrast to the null hypothesis, or the assumption that there is no significant relationship between the variables .

Here, we explore various kinds of hypotheses to provide you with the tools needed to craft effective hypotheses for your specific research needs. Bear in mind that many of these hypothesis types may overlap with one another, and the specific type that is typically used will likely depend on the area of research and methodology you are following.

Null hypothesis

The null hypothesis is a statement that there is no effect or relationship between the variables being studied. In statistical terms, it serves as the default assumption that any observed differences are due to random chance.

For example, if you're studying the effect of a drug on blood pressure, the null hypothesis might state that the drug has no effect.

Alternative hypothesis

Contrary to the null hypothesis, the alternative hypothesis suggests that there is a significant relationship or effect between variables.

Using the drug example, the alternative hypothesis would posit that the drug does indeed affect blood pressure. This is what researchers aim to prove.

Simple hypothesis

A simple hypothesis makes a prediction about the relationship between two variables, and only two variables.

For example, "Increased study time results in better exam scores." Here, "study time" and "exam scores" are the only variables involved.

Complex hypothesis

A complex hypothesis, as the name suggests, involves more than two variables. For instance, "Increased study time and access to resources result in better exam scores." Here, "study time," "access to resources," and "exam scores" are all variables.

This hypothesis refers to multiple potential mediating variables. Other hypotheses could also include predictions about variables that moderate the relationship between the independent variable and dependent variable .

Directional hypothesis

A directional hypothesis specifies the direction of the expected relationship between variables. For example, "Eating more fruits and vegetables leads to a decrease in heart disease."

Here, the direction of heart disease is explicitly predicted to decrease, due to effects from eating more fruits and vegetables. All hypotheses typically specify the expected direction of the relationship between the independent and dependent variable, such that researchers can test if this prediction holds in their data analysis .

Statistical hypothesis

A statistical hypothesis is one that is testable through statistical methods, providing a numerical value that can be analyzed. This is commonly seen in quantitative research .

For example, "There is a statistically significant difference in test scores between students who study for one hour and those who study for two."

Empirical hypothesis

An empirical hypothesis is derived from observations and is tested through empirical methods, often through experimentation or survey data . Empirical hypotheses may also be assessed with statistical analyses.

For example, "Regular exercise is correlated with a lower incidence of depression," could be tested through surveys that measure exercise frequency and depression levels.

Causal hypothesis

A causal hypothesis proposes that one variable causes a change in another. This type of hypothesis is often tested through controlled experiments.

For example, "Smoking causes lung cancer," assumes a direct causal relationship.

Associative hypothesis

Unlike causal hypotheses, associative hypotheses suggest a relationship between variables but do not imply causation.

For instance, "People who smoke are more likely to get lung cancer," notes an association but doesn't claim that smoking causes lung cancer directly.

Relational hypothesis

A relational hypothesis explores the relationship between two or more variables but doesn't specify the nature of the relationship.

For example, "There is a relationship between diet and heart health," leaves the nature of the relationship (causal, associative, etc.) open to interpretation.

Logical hypothesis

A logical hypothesis is based on sound reasoning and logical principles. It's often used in theoretical research to explore abstract concepts, rather than being based on empirical data.

For example, "If all men are mortal and Socrates is a man, then Socrates is mortal," employs logical reasoning to make its point.

Let ATLAS.ti take you from research question to key insights

Get started with a free trial and see how ATLAS.ti can make the most of your data.

In any research hypothesis, variables play a critical role. These are the elements or factors that the researcher manipulates, controls, or measures. Understanding variables is essential for crafting a clear, testable hypothesis and for the stages of research that follow, such as data collection and analysis.

In the realm of hypotheses, there are generally two types of variables to consider: independent and dependent. Independent variables are what you, as the researcher, manipulate or change in your study. It's considered the cause in the relationship you're investigating. For instance, in a study examining the impact of sleep duration on academic performance, the independent variable would be the amount of sleep participants get.

Conversely, the dependent variable is the outcome you measure to gauge the effect of your manipulation. It's the effect in the cause-and-effect relationship. The dependent variable thus refers to the main outcome of interest in your study. In the same sleep study example, the academic performance, perhaps measured by exam scores or GPA, would be the dependent variable.

Beyond these two primary types, you might also encounter control variables. These are variables that could potentially influence the outcome and are therefore kept constant to isolate the relationship between the independent and dependent variables . For example, in the sleep and academic performance study, control variables could include age, diet, or even the subject of study.

By clearly identifying and understanding the roles of these variables in your hypothesis, you set the stage for a methodologically sound research project. It helps you develop focused research questions, design appropriate experiments or observations, and carry out meaningful data analysis . It's a step that lays the groundwork for the success of your entire study.

Crafting a strong, testable hypothesis is crucial for the success of any research project. It sets the stage for everything from your study design to data collection and analysis . Below are some key considerations to keep in mind when formulating your hypothesis:

• Be specific : A vague hypothesis can lead to ambiguous results and interpretations . Clearly define your variables and the expected relationship between them.
• Ensure testability : A good hypothesis should be testable through empirical means, whether by observation , experimentation, or other forms of data analysis.
• Ground in literature : Before creating your hypothesis, consult existing research and theories. This not only helps you identify gaps in current knowledge but also gives you valuable context and credibility for crafting your hypothesis.
• Use simple language : While your hypothesis should be conceptually sound, it doesn't have to be complicated. Aim for clarity and simplicity in your wording.
• State direction, if applicable : If your hypothesis involves a directional outcome (e.g., "increase" or "decrease"), make sure to specify this. You also need to think about how you will measure whether or not the outcome moved in the direction you predicted.
• Keep it focused : One of the common pitfalls in hypothesis formulation is trying to answer too many questions at once. Keep your hypothesis focused on a specific issue or relationship.
• Account for control variables : Identify any variables that could potentially impact the outcome and consider how you will control for them in your study.
• Be ethical : Make sure your hypothesis and the methods for testing it comply with ethical standards , particularly if your research involves human or animal subjects.

Designing your study involves multiple key phases that help ensure the rigor and validity of your research. Here we discuss these crucial components in more detail.

Literature review

Starting with a comprehensive literature review is essential. This step allows you to understand the existing body of knowledge related to your hypothesis and helps you identify gaps that your research could fill. Your research should aim to contribute some novel understanding to existing literature, and your hypotheses can reflect this. A literature review also provides valuable insights into how similar research projects were executed, thereby helping you fine-tune your own approach.

Research methods

Choosing the right research methods is critical. Whether it's a survey, an experiment, or observational study, the methodology should be the most appropriate for testing your hypothesis. Your choice of methods will also depend on whether your research is quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods. Make sure the chosen methods align well with the variables you are studying and the type of data you need.

Preliminary research

Before diving into a full-scale study, it’s often beneficial to conduct preliminary research or a pilot study . This allows you to test your research methods on a smaller scale, refine your tools, and identify any potential issues. For instance, a pilot survey can help you determine if your questions are clear and if the survey effectively captures the data you need. This step can save you both time and resources in the long run.

Data analysis

Finally, planning your data analysis in advance is crucial for a successful study. Decide which statistical or analytical tools are most suited for your data type and research questions . For quantitative research, you might opt for t-tests, ANOVA, or regression analyses. For qualitative research , thematic analysis or grounded theory may be more appropriate. This phase is integral for interpreting your results and drawing meaningful conclusions in relation to your research question.

Turn data into evidence for insights with ATLAS.ti

Powerful analysis for your research paper or presentation is at your fingertips starting with a free trial.

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

Step-by-Step Guide: How to Craft a Strong Research Hypothesis

• 4 minute read
• 376.6K views

Table of Contents

A research hypothesis is a concise statement about the expected result of an experiment or project. In many ways, a research hypothesis represents the starting point for a scientific endeavor, as it establishes a tentative assumption that is eventually substantiated or falsified, ultimately improving our certainty about the subject investigated.   

To help you with this and ease the process, in this article, we discuss the purpose of research hypotheses and list the most essential qualities of a compelling hypothesis. Let’s find out!  

How to Craft a Research Hypothesis  

Crafting a research hypothesis begins with a comprehensive literature review to identify a knowledge gap in your field. Once you find a question or problem, come up with a possible answer or explanation, which becomes your hypothesis. Now think about the specific methods of experimentation that can prove or disprove the hypothesis, which ultimately lead to the results of the study.   

Enlisted below are some standard formats in which you can formulate a hypothesis¹ :  

• A hypothesis can use the if/then format when it seeks to explore the correlation between two variables in a study primarily.  

Example: If administered drug X, then patients will experience reduced fatigue from cancer treatment.  

• A hypothesis can adopt when X/then Y format when it primarily aims to expose a connection between two variables  

Example: When workers spend a significant portion of their waking hours in sedentary work , then they experience a greater frequency of digestive problems.  

• A hypothesis can also take the form of a direct statement.  

Example: Drug X and drug Y reduce the risk of cognitive decline through the same chemical pathways  

What are the Features of an Effective Hypothesis?  

Hypotheses in research need to satisfy specific criteria to be considered scientifically rigorous. Here are the most notable qualities of a strong hypothesis:  

• Testability: Ensure the hypothesis allows you to work towards observable and testable results.  
• Brevity and objectivity: Present your hypothesis as a brief statement and avoid wordiness.  
• Clarity and Relevance: The hypothesis should reflect a clear idea of what we know and what we expect to find out about a phenomenon and address the significant knowledge gap relevant to a field of study.   

Understanding Null and Alternative Hypotheses in Research  

There are two types of hypotheses used commonly in research that aid statistical analyses. These are known as the null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis . A null hypothesis is a statement assumed to be factual in the initial phase of the study.   

For example, if a researcher is testing the efficacy of a new drug, then the null hypothesis will posit that the drug has no benefits compared to an inactive control or placebo . Suppose the data collected through a drug trial leads a researcher to reject the null hypothesis. In that case, it is considered to substantiate the alternative hypothesis in the above example, that the new drug provides benefits compared to the placebo.  

Let’s take a closer look at the null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis with two more examples:  

Null Hypothesis:  

The rate of decline in the number of species in habitat X in the last year is the same as in the last 100 years when controlled for all factors except the recent wildfires.  

In the next experiment, the researcher will experimentally reject this null hypothesis in order to confirm the following alternative hypothesis :  

The rate of decline in the number of species in habitat X in the last year is different from the rate of decline in the last 100 years when controlled for all factors other than the recent wildfires.  

In the pair of null and alternative hypotheses stated above, a statistical comparison of the rate of species decline over a century and the preceding year will help the research experimentally test the null hypothesis, helping to draw scientifically valid conclusions about two factors—wildfires and species decline.   

We also recommend that researchers pay attention to contextual echoes and connections when writing research hypotheses. Research hypotheses are often closely linked to the introduction ² , such as the context of the study, and can similarly influence the reader’s judgment of the relevance and validity of the research hypothesis.  

Seasoned experts, such as professionals at Elsevier Language Services, guide authors on how to best embed a hypothesis within an article so that it communicates relevance and credibility. Contact us if you want help in ensuring readers find your hypothesis robust and unbiased.  

References  

• Hypotheses – The University Writing Center. (n.d.). https://writingcenter.tamu.edu/writing-speaking-guides/hypotheses  
• Shaping the research question and hypothesis. (n.d.). Students. https://students.unimelb.edu.au/academic-skills/graduate-research-services/writing-thesis-sections-part-2/shaping-the-research-question-and-hypothesis  

Systematic Literature Review or Literature Review?

How to Write an Effective Problem Statement for Your Research Paper

You may also like.

Submission 101: What format should be used for academic papers?

Page-Turner Articles are More Than Just Good Arguments: Be Mindful of Tone and Structure!

A Must-see for Researchers! How to Ensure Inclusivity in Your Scientific Writing

Make Hook, Line, and Sinker: The Art of Crafting Engaging Introductions

Can Describing Study Limitations Improve the Quality of Your Paper?

A Guide to Crafting Shorter, Impactful Sentences in Academic Writing

6 Steps to Write an Excellent Discussion in Your Manuscript

How to Write Clear and Crisp Civil Engineering Papers? Here are 5 Key Tips to Consider

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

• 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.

Instant insights, infinite possibilities

How to write a research hypothesis

Last updated

19 January 2023

Reviewed by

Miroslav Damyanov

Start with a broad subject matter that excites you, so your curiosity will motivate your work. Conduct a literature search to determine the range of questions already addressed and spot any holes in the existing research.

Narrow the topics that interest you and determine your research question. Rather than focusing on a hole in the research, you might choose to challenge an existing assumption, a process called problematization. You may also find yourself with a short list of questions or related topics.

Use the FINER method to determine the single problem you'll address with your research. FINER stands for:

I nteresting

You need a feasible research question, meaning that there is a way to address the question. You should find it interesting, but so should a larger audience. Rather than repeating research that others have already conducted, your research hypothesis should test something novel or unique. 

The research must fall into accepted ethical parameters as defined by the government of your country and your university or college if you're an academic. You'll also need to come up with a relevant question since your research should provide a contribution to the existing research area.

This process typically narrows your shortlist down to a single problem you'd like to study and the variable you want to test. You're ready to write your hypothesis statements.

Make research less tedious

Dovetail streamlines research to help you uncover and share actionable insights

• Types of research hypotheses

It is important to narrow your topic down to one idea before trying to write your research hypothesis. You'll only test one problem at a time. To do this, you'll write two hypotheses – a null hypothesis (H0) and an alternative hypothesis (Ha).

You'll come across many terms related to developing a research hypothesis or referring to a specific type of hypothesis. Let's take a quick look at these terms.

Null hypothesis

The term null hypothesis refers to a research hypothesis type that assumes no statistically significant relationship exists within a set of observations or data. It represents a claim that assumes that any observed relationship is due to chance. Represented as H0, the null represents the conjecture of the research.

Alternative hypothesis

The alternative hypothesis accompanies the null hypothesis. It states that the situation presented in the null hypothesis is false or untrue, and claims an observed effect in your test. This is typically denoted by Ha or H(n), where “n” stands for the number of alternative hypotheses. You can have more than one alternative hypothesis. 

Simple hypothesis

The term simple hypothesis refers to a hypothesis or theory that predicts the relationship between two variables - the independent (predictor) and the dependent (predicted). 

Complex hypothesis

The term complex hypothesis refers to a model – either quantitative (mathematical) or qualitative . A complex hypothesis states the surmised relationship between two or more potentially related variables.

Directional hypothesis

When creating a statistical hypothesis, the directional hypothesis (the null hypothesis) states an assumption regarding one parameter of a population. Some academics call this the “one-sided” hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis indicates whether the researcher tests for a positive or negative effect by including either the greater than (">") or less than ("<") sign.

Non-directional hypothesis

We refer to the alternative hypothesis in a statistical research question as a non-directional hypothesis. It includes the not equal ("≠") sign to show that the research tests whether or not an effect exists without specifying the effect's direction (positive or negative).

Associative hypothesis

The term associative hypothesis assumes a link between two variables but stops short of stating that one variable impacts the other. Academic statistical literature asserts in this sense that correlation does not imply causation. So, although the hypothesis notes the correlation between two variables – the independent and dependent - it does not predict how the two interact.

Logical hypothesis

Typically used in philosophy rather than science, researchers can't test a logical hypothesis because the technology or data set doesn't yet exist. A logical hypothesis uses logic as the basis of its assumptions. 

In some cases, a logical hypothesis can become an empirical hypothesis once technology provides an opportunity for testing. Until that time, the question remains too expensive or complex to address. Note that a logical hypothesis is not a statistical hypothesis.

Empirical hypothesis

When we consider the opposite of a logical hypothesis, we call this an empirical or working hypothesis. This type of hypothesis considers a scientifically measurable question. A researcher can consider and test an empirical hypothesis through replicable tests, observations, and measurements.

Statistical hypothesis

The term statistical hypothesis refers to a test of a theory that uses representative statistical models to test relationships between variables to draw conclusions regarding a large population. This requires an existing large data set, commonly referred to as big data, or implementing a survey to obtain original statistical information to form a data set for the study. 

Testing this type of hypothesis requires the use of random samples. Note that the null and alternative hypotheses are used in statistical hypothesis testing.

Causal hypothesis

The term causal hypothesis refers to a research hypothesis that tests a cause-and-effect relationship. A causal hypothesis is utilized when conducting experimental or quasi-experimental research.

Descriptive hypothesis

The term descriptive hypothesis refers to a research hypothesis used in non-experimental research, specifying an influence in the relationship between two variables.

• What makes an effective research hypothesis?

An effective research hypothesis offers a clearly defined, specific statement, using simple wording that contains no assumptions or generalizations, and that you can test. A well-written hypothesis should predict the tested relationship and its outcome. It contains zero ambiguity and offers results you can observe and test. 

The research hypothesis should address a question relevant to a research area. Overall, your research hypothesis needs the following essentials:

Hypothesis Essential #1: Specificity & Clarity

Hypothesis Essential #2: Testability (Provability)

• How to develop a good research hypothesis

In developing your hypothesis statements, you must pre-plan some of your statistical analysis. Once you decide on your problem to examine, determine three aspects:

the parameter you'll test

the test's direction (left-tailed, right-tailed, or non-directional)

the hypothesized parameter value

Any quantitative research includes a hypothesized parameter value of a mean, a proportion, or the difference between two proportions. Here's how to note each parameter:

Single mean (μ)

Paired means (μd)

Single proportion (p)

Difference between two independent means (μ1−μ2)

Difference between two proportions (p1−p2)

Simple linear regression slope (β)

Correlation (ρ)

Defining these parameters and determining whether you want to test the mean, proportion, or differences helps you determine the statistical tests you'll conduct to analyze your data. When writing your hypothesis, you only need to decide which parameter to test and in what overarching way.

The null research hypothesis must include everyday language, in a single sentence, stating the problem you want to solve. Write it as an if-then statement with defined variables. Write an alternative research hypothesis that states the opposite.

• What is the correct format for writing a hypothesis?

The following example shows the proper format and textual content of a hypothesis. It follows commonly accepted academic standards.

Null hypothesis (H0): High school students who participate in varsity sports as opposed to those who do not, fail to score higher on leadership tests than students who do not participate.

Alternative hypothesis (H1): High school students who play a varsity sport as opposed to those who do not participate in team athletics will score higher on leadership tests than students who do not participate in athletics.

The research question tests the correlation between varsity sports participation and leadership qualities expressed as a score on leadership tests. It compares the population of athletes to non-athletes.

• What are the five steps of a hypothesis?

Once you decide on the specific problem or question you want to address, you can write your research hypothesis. Use this five-step system to hone your null hypothesis and generate your alternative hypothesis.

Step 1 : Create your research question. This topic should interest and excite you; answering it provides relevant information to an industry or academic area.

Step 2 : Conduct a literature review to gather essential existing research.

Step 3 : Write a clear, strong, simply worded sentence that explains your test parameter, test direction, and hypothesized parameter.

Step 4 : Read it a few times. Have others read it and ask them what they think it means. Refine your statement accordingly until it becomes understandable to everyone. While not everyone can or will comprehend every research study conducted, any person from the general population should be able to read your hypothesis and alternative hypothesis and understand the essential question you want to answer.

Step 5 : Re-write your null hypothesis until it reads simply and understandably. Write your alternative hypothesis.

What is the Red Queen hypothesis?

Some hypotheses are well-known, such as the Red Queen hypothesis. Choose your wording carefully, since you could become like the famed scientist Dr. Leigh Van Valen. In 1973, Dr. Van Valen proposed the Red Queen hypothesis to describe coevolutionary activity, specifically reciprocal evolutionary effects between species to explain extinction rates in the fossil record. 

Essentially, Van Valen theorized that to survive, each species remains in a constant state of adaptation, evolution, and proliferation, and constantly competes for survival alongside other species doing the same. Only by doing this can a species avoid extinction. Van Valen took the hypothesis title from the Lewis Carroll book, "Through the Looking Glass," which contains a key character named the Red Queen who explains to Alice that for all of her running, she's merely running in place.

• Getting started with your research

In conclusion, once you write your null hypothesis (H0) and an alternative hypothesis (Ha), you’ve essentially authored the elevator pitch of your research. These two one-sentence statements describe your topic in simple, understandable terms that both professionals and laymen can understand. They provide the starting point of your research project.

Should you be using a customer insights hub?

Do you want to discover previous research faster?

Do you share your research findings with others?

Do you analyze research data?

Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 18 April 2023

Last updated: 27 February 2023

Last updated: 22 August 2024

Last updated: 5 February 2023

Last updated: 16 August 2024

Last updated: 9 March 2023

Last updated: 30 April 2024

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 4 July 2024

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 13 May 2024

Latest articles

Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next, log in or sign up.

Get started for free

How to Develop a Good Research Hypothesis

The story of a research study begins by asking a question. Researchers all around the globe are asking curious questions and formulating research hypothesis. However, whether the research study provides an effective conclusion depends on how well one develops a good research hypothesis. Research hypothesis examples could help researchers get an idea as to how to write a good research hypothesis.

This blog will help you understand what is a research hypothesis, its characteristics and, how to formulate a research hypothesis

Table of Contents

What is Hypothesis?

Hypothesis is an assumption or an idea proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested. It is a precise, testable statement of what the researchers predict will be outcome of the study.  Hypothesis usually involves proposing a relationship between two variables: the independent variable (what the researchers change) and the dependent variable (what the research measures).

What is a Research Hypothesis?

Research hypothesis is a statement that introduces a research question and proposes an expected result. It is an integral part of the scientific method that forms the basis of scientific experiments. Therefore, you need to be careful and thorough when building your research hypothesis. A minor flaw in the construction of your hypothesis could have an adverse effect on your experiment. In research, there is a convention that the hypothesis is written in two forms, the null hypothesis, and the alternative hypothesis (called the experimental hypothesis when the method of investigation is an experiment).

Characteristics of a Good Research Hypothesis

As the hypothesis is specific, there is a testable prediction about what you expect to happen in a study. You may consider drawing hypothesis from previously published research based on the theory.

A good research hypothesis involves more effort than just a guess. In particular, your hypothesis may begin with a question that could be further explored through background research.

To help you formulate a promising research hypothesis, you should ask yourself the following questions:

• Is the language clear and focused?
• What is the relationship between your hypothesis and your research topic?
• Is your hypothesis testable? If yes, then how?
• What are the possible explanations that you might want to explore?
• Does your hypothesis include both an independent and dependent variable?
• Can you manipulate your variables without hampering the ethical standards?
• Does your research predict the relationship and outcome?
• Is your research simple and concise (avoids wordiness)?
• Is it clear with no ambiguity or assumptions about the readers’ knowledge
• Is your research observable and testable results?
• Is it relevant and specific to the research question or problem?

The questions listed above can be used as a checklist to make sure your hypothesis is based on a solid foundation. Furthermore, it can help you identify weaknesses in your hypothesis and revise it if necessary.

Source: Educational Hub

How to formulate a research hypothesis.

A testable hypothesis is not a simple statement. It is rather an intricate statement that needs to offer a clear introduction to a scientific experiment, its intentions, and the possible outcomes. However, there are some important things to consider when building a compelling hypothesis.

1. State the problem that you are trying to solve.

Make sure that the hypothesis clearly defines the topic and the focus of the experiment.

2. Try to write the hypothesis as an if-then statement.

Follow this template: If a specific action is taken, then a certain outcome is expected.

3. Define the variables

Independent variables are the ones that are manipulated, controlled, or changed. Independent variables are isolated from other factors of the study.

Dependent variables , as the name suggests are dependent on other factors of the study. They are influenced by the change in independent variable.

4. Scrutinize the hypothesis

Evaluate assumptions, predictions, and evidence rigorously to refine your understanding.

Types of Research Hypothesis

The types of research hypothesis are stated below:

1. Simple Hypothesis

It predicts the relationship between a single dependent variable and a single independent variable.

2. Complex Hypothesis

It predicts the relationship between two or more independent and dependent variables.

3. Directional Hypothesis

It specifies the expected direction to be followed to determine the relationship between variables and is derived from theory. Furthermore, it implies the researcher’s intellectual commitment to a particular outcome.

4. Non-directional Hypothesis

It does not predict the exact direction or nature of the relationship between the two variables. The non-directional hypothesis is used when there is no theory involved or when findings contradict previous research.

5. Associative and Causal Hypothesis

The associative hypothesis defines interdependency between variables. A change in one variable results in the change of the other variable. On the other hand, the causal hypothesis proposes an effect on the dependent due to manipulation of the independent variable.

6. Null Hypothesis

Null hypothesis states a negative statement to support the researcher’s findings that there is no relationship between two variables. There will be no changes in the dependent variable due the manipulation of the independent variable. Furthermore, it states results are due to chance and are not significant in terms of supporting the idea being investigated.

7. Alternative Hypothesis

It states that there is a relationship between the two variables of the study and that the results are significant to the research topic. An experimental hypothesis predicts what changes will take place in the dependent variable when the independent variable is manipulated. Also, it states that the results are not due to chance and that they are significant in terms of supporting the theory being investigated.

Research Hypothesis Examples of Independent and Dependent Variables

Research Hypothesis Example 1 The greater number of coal plants in a region (independent variable) increases water pollution (dependent variable). If you change the independent variable (building more coal factories), it will change the dependent variable (amount of water pollution).

Research Hypothesis Example 2 What is the effect of diet or regular soda (independent variable) on blood sugar levels (dependent variable)? If you change the independent variable (the type of soda you consume), it will change the dependent variable (blood sugar levels)

You should not ignore the importance of the above steps. The validity of your experiment and its results rely on a robust testable hypothesis. Developing a strong testable hypothesis has few advantages, it compels us to think intensely and specifically about the outcomes of a study. Consequently, it enables us to understand the implication of the question and the different variables involved in the study. Furthermore, it helps us to make precise predictions based on prior research. Hence, forming a hypothesis would be of great value to the research. Here are some good examples of testable hypotheses.

More importantly, you need to build a robust testable research hypothesis for your scientific experiments. A testable hypothesis is a hypothesis that can be proved or disproved as a result of experimentation.

Importance of a Testable Hypothesis

To devise and perform an experiment using scientific method, you need to make sure that your hypothesis is testable. To be considered testable, some essential criteria must be met:

• There must be a possibility to prove that the hypothesis is true.
• There must be a possibility to prove that the hypothesis is false.
• The results of the hypothesis must be reproducible.

Without these criteria, the hypothesis and the results will be vague. As a result, the experiment will not prove or disprove anything significant.

What are your experiences with building hypotheses for scientific experiments? What challenges did you face? How did you overcome these challenges? Please share your thoughts with us in the comments section.

Frequently Asked Questions

The steps to write a research hypothesis are: 1. Stating the problem: Ensure that the hypothesis defines the research problem 2. Writing a hypothesis as an 'if-then' statement: Include the action and the expected outcome of your study by following a ‘if-then’ structure. 3. Defining the variables: Define the variables as Dependent or Independent based on their dependency to other factors. 4. Scrutinizing the hypothesis: Identify the type of your hypothesis

Hypothesis testing is a statistical tool which is used to make inferences about a population data to draw conclusions for a particular hypothesis.

Hypothesis in statistics is a formal statement about the nature of a population within a structured framework of a statistical model. It is used to test an existing hypothesis by studying a population.

Research hypothesis is a statement that introduces a research question and proposes an expected result. It forms the basis of scientific experiments.

The different types of hypothesis in research are: • Null hypothesis: Null hypothesis is a negative statement to support the researcher’s findings that there is no relationship between two variables. • Alternate hypothesis: Alternate hypothesis predicts the relationship between the two variables of the study. • Directional hypothesis: Directional hypothesis specifies the expected direction to be followed to determine the relationship between variables. • Non-directional hypothesis: Non-directional hypothesis does not predict the exact direction or nature of the relationship between the two variables. • Simple hypothesis: Simple hypothesis predicts the relationship between a single dependent variable and a single independent variable. • Complex hypothesis: Complex hypothesis predicts the relationship between two or more independent and dependent variables. • Associative and casual hypothesis: Associative and casual hypothesis predicts the relationship between two or more independent and dependent variables. • Empirical hypothesis: Empirical hypothesis can be tested via experiments and observation. • Statistical hypothesis: A statistical hypothesis utilizes statistical models to draw conclusions about broader populations.

Wow! You really simplified your explanation that even dummies would find it easy to comprehend. Thank you so much.

Thanks a lot for your valuable guidance.

I enjoy reading the post. Hypotheses are actually an intrinsic part in a study. It bridges the research question and the methodology of the study.

Useful piece!

This is awesome.Wow.

It very interesting to read the topic, can you guide me any specific example of hypothesis process establish throw the Demand and supply of the specific product in market

Nicely explained

It is really a useful for me Kindly give some examples of hypothesis

It was a well explained content ,can you please give me an example with the null and alternative hypothesis illustrated

clear and concise. thanks.

So Good so Amazing

Good to learn

Thanks a lot for explaining to my level of understanding

Explained well and in simple terms. Quick read! Thank you

It awesome. It has really positioned me in my research project

Brief and easily digested

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

• Industry News

COPE Forum Discussion Highlights Challenges and Urges Clarity in Institutional Authorship Standards

The COPE forum discussion held in December 2023 initiated with a fundamental question — is…

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right…

How to Design Effective Research Questionnaires for Robust Findings

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.

• Publishing Research
• AI in Academia
• Promoting Research
• 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:

Which among these features would you prefer the most in a peer review assistant?

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

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 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.

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.

• Research Consultation
• How-to Guides
• People Search
• Library Databases
• Research Guides
• Find Periodicals
• Google Scholar
• Library Map
• Interlibrary Loan - ILL
• Research & Instruction
• Computers and Laptops
• Services For...
• Reserve a Room
• APSU Records Management
• Library Collections
• Digital Collections
• Special Collections
• Veterans' Oral History
• Government Resources
• Subject Librarians
• Library Information
• Woodward Library Society
• New @ Woodward Library
• Celebration of Scholarship
• Join Woodward Library Society

Original Research: Creating a Hypothesis

• Initial Steps

Creating a Hypothesis

• Research Designs and Methods
• Submitting a Research Plan for Review
• Performing the Research
• Analyzing the Data
• Writing the Research Paper

After following the initial steps, the researcher should be able to create a hypothesis that can be tested. A hypothesis is a proposed statement that is intended to explain a theory for why something happens. To create a solid hypothesis, make sure it is not listed as a question, but as a prediction statement. To create a research hypothesis there has to be both a dependent and independent variable, and an expected outcome. Independent variables are what may be changed in the experiment to create an outcome. The dependent variable is what the experiment is intended to measure based on changes made to the independent variable. Defining the expected outcome creates the predictive component of the hypothesis that can be tested. Incorporating these elements into a simple predictive statement ensures that you can determine an outcome from the experiment. Ensure that any variables are taken into consideration, and that the results from the hypothesis are measurable.

Types of Hypotheses

There are many types of hypotheses, but the seven most common are the following:

• Simple Hypothesis - Questions the relationship between the dependent and independent variables.
• Complex Hypothesis - Questions the effect of multiple dependent and independent variables.
• Empirical Hypothesis - Often called a working hypothesis, this question is applied to a specific field when looking for empirical evidence.
• Null Hypothesis - This is used to contradict the expected effect of dependent and independent variables. 
• Alternative Hypothesis - Several hypotheses are given, but as the experiment proceeds, the alternative hypothesis is introduced to reflect the conditions of the experiment. 
• Logical Hypothesis - These hypotheses are able to be verified using logic.
• Statistical Hypothesis ​ - A hypothesis of this type is one that can be proven using statistical analysis.

For more information about how to create a hypothesis, have a look at the  Fundamentals of Research Methodology  by Engwa Godwill. 

Based on the hypothesis created, the researcher will need to determine the best research design for the experiment. 

Health Sciences Librarian

• << Previous: Initial Steps
• Next: Research Designs and Methods >>
• Last Updated: Jul 26, 2023 10:10 AM
• URL: https://libguides.apsu.edu/OriginalResearch

HOW TO: Use Articles for Research: Introduction: Hypothesis/Thesis

• What's a Scholarly Journal?
• Reading the Citation
• Authors' Credentials
• Introduction: Hypothesis/Thesis
• Literature Review
• Research Method
• Results/Data
• Discussion/Conclusions

Hypothesis or Thesis

The first few paragraphs of a journal article serve to introduce the topic, to provide the author's hypothesis or thesis, and to indicate why the research was done.  A thesis or hypothesis is not always clearly labled; you may need to read through the introductory paragraphs to determine what the authors are proposing.

• << Previous: Abstract
• Next: Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Jan 29, 2024 3:35 PM
• URL: https://libguides.cayuga-cc.edu/1ST-PRIORITY/articles

Module 1: Introduction: What is Research?

Learning Objectives

By the end of this module, you will be able to:

• Explain how the scientific method is used to develop new knowledge
• Describe why it is important to follow a research plan

The Scientific Method consists of observing the world around you and creating a  hypothesis  about relationships in the world. A hypothesis is an informed and educated prediction or explanation about something. Part of the research process involves testing the  hypothesis , and then examining the results of these tests as they relate to both the hypothesis and the world around you. When a researcher forms a hypothesis, this acts like a map through the research study. It tells the researcher which factors are important to study and how they might be related to each other or caused by a  manipulation  that the researcher introduces (e.g. a program, treatment or change in the environment). With this map, the researcher can interpret the information he/she collects and can make sound conclusions about the results.

Research can be done with human beings, animals, plants, other organisms and inorganic matter. When research is done with human beings and animals, it must follow specific rules about the treatment of humans and animals that have been created by the U.S. Federal Government. This ensures that humans and animals are treated with dignity and respect, and that the research causes minimal harm.

No matter what topic is being studied, the value of the research depends on how well it is designed and done. Therefore, one of the most important considerations in doing good research is to follow the design or plan that is developed by an experienced researcher who is called the  Principal Investigator  (PI). The PI is in charge of all aspects of the research and creates what is called a  protocol  (the research plan) that all people doing the research must follow. By doing so, the PI and the public can be sure that the results of the research are real and useful to other scientists.

Module 1: Discussion Questions

• How is a hypothesis like a road map?
• Who is ultimately responsible for the design and conduct of a research study?
• How does following the research protocol contribute to informing public health practices?

Email Updates

How to Write a Research Paper Introduction (with Examples)

The research paper introduction section, along with the Title and Abstract, can be considered the face of any research paper. The following article is intended to guide you in organizing and writing the research paper introduction for a quality academic article or dissertation.

The research paper introduction aims to present the topic to the reader. A study will only be accepted for publishing if you can ascertain that the available literature cannot answer your research question. So it is important to ensure that you have read important studies on that particular topic, especially those within the last five to ten years, and that they are properly referenced in this section. 1 What should be included in the research paper introduction is decided by what you want to tell readers about the reason behind the research and how you plan to fill the knowledge gap. The best research paper introduction provides a systemic review of existing work and demonstrates additional work that needs to be done. It needs to be brief, captivating, and well-referenced; a well-drafted research paper introduction will help the researcher win half the battle.

The introduction for a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:

• Present your research topic
• Capture reader interest
• Summarize existing research
• Position your own approach
• Define your specific research problem and problem statement
• Highlight the novelty and contributions of the study
• Give an overview of the paper’s structure

The research paper introduction can vary in size and structure depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or is a review paper. Some research paper introduction examples are only half a page while others are a few pages long. In many cases, the introduction will be shorter than all of the other sections of your paper; its length depends on the size of your paper as a whole.

Break through writer’s block. Write your research paper introduction with Paperpal’s Generative AI features

Table of Contents

What is the introduction for a research paper, what are the parts of introduction in the research, 1. introduce the research topic:, 2. determine a research niche:, 3. place your research within the research niche:, how to use paperpal to write the introduction section, frequently asked questions on research paper introduction, key points to remember.

The introduction in a research paper is placed at the beginning to guide the reader from a broad subject area to the specific topic that your research addresses. They present the following information to the reader

• Scope: The topic covered in the research paper
• Context: Background of your topic
• Importance: Why your research matters in that particular area of research and the industry problem that can be targeted

Why is the introduction important in a research paper?

The research paper introduction conveys a lot of information and can be considered an essential roadmap for the rest of your paper. A good introduction for a research paper is important for the following reasons:

• It stimulates your reader’s interest: A good introduction section can make your readers want to read your paper by capturing their interest. It informs the reader what they are going to learn and helps determine if the topic is of interest to them.
• It helps the reader understand the research background: Without a clear introduction, your readers may feel confused and even struggle when reading your paper. A good research paper introduction will prepare them for the in-depth research to come. It provides you the opportunity to engage with the readers and demonstrate your knowledge and authority on the specific topic.
• It explains why your research paper is worth reading: Your introduction can convey a lot of information to your readers. It introduces the topic, why the topic is important, and how you plan to proceed with your research.
• It helps guide the reader through the rest of the paper: The research paper introduction gives the reader a sense of the nature of the information that will support your arguments and the general organization of the paragraphs that will follow. It offers an overview of what to expect when reading the main body of your paper.

A good research paper introduction section should comprise three main elements: 2

• What is known: This sets the stage for your research. It informs the readers of what is known on the subject.
• What is lacking: This is aimed at justifying the reason for carrying out your research. This could involve investigating a new concept or method or building upon previous research.
• What you aim to do: This part briefly states the objectives of your research and its major contributions. Your detailed hypothesis will also form a part of this section.

Craft a compelling Introduction section with Paperpal. Try Now!

How to write a research paper introduction?

The first step in writing the research paper introduction is to inform the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening statement. The second step involves establishing the kinds of research that have been done and ending with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to address. Finally, the research paper introduction clarifies how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses. If your research involved testing hypotheses, these should be stated along with your research question. The hypothesis should be presented in the past tense since it will have been tested by the time you are writing the research paper introduction.

The following key points, with examples, can guide you when writing the research paper introduction section:

• Highlight the importance of the research field or topic
• Describe the background of the topic
• Present an overview of current research on the topic

Example: The inclusion of experiential and competency-based learning has benefitted electronics engineering education. Industry partnerships provide an excellent alternative for students wanting to engage in solving real-world challenges. Industry-academia participation has grown in recent years due to the need for skilled engineers with practical training and specialized expertise. However, from the educational perspective, many activities are needed to incorporate sustainable development goals into the university curricula and consolidate learning innovation in universities.

• Reveal a gap in existing research or oppose an existing assumption
• Formulate the research question

Example: There have been plausible efforts to integrate educational activities in higher education electronics engineering programs. However, very few studies have considered using educational research methods for performance evaluation of competency-based higher engineering education, with a focus on technical and or transversal skills. To remedy the current need for evaluating competencies in STEM fields and providing sustainable development goals in engineering education, in this study, a comparison was drawn between study groups without and with industry partners.

• State the purpose of your study
• Highlight the key characteristics of your study
• Describe important results
• Highlight the novelty of the study.
• Offer a brief overview of the structure of the paper.

Example: The study evaluates the main competency needed in the applied electronics course, which is a fundamental core subject for many electronics engineering undergraduate programs. We compared two groups, without and with an industrial partner, that offered real-world projects to solve during the semester. This comparison can help determine significant differences in both groups in terms of developing subject competency and achieving sustainable development goals.

Write a Research Paper Introduction in Minutes with Paperpal

Paperpal is a generative AI-powered academic writing assistant. It’s trained on millions of published scholarly articles and over 20 years of STM experience. Paperpal helps authors write better and faster with:

• Real-time writing suggestions
• In-depth checks for language and grammar correction
• Paraphrasing to add variety, ensure academic tone, and trim text to meet journal limits

With Paperpal, create a research paper introduction effortlessly. In this step-by-step guide, we’ll walk you through how Paperpal transforms your initial ideas into a polished and publication-ready introduction.

Step 1: Sign up on Paperpal and click on the Copilot feature, under this choose Outlines > Research Article > Introduction

Step 2: Add your unstructured notes or initial draft, whether in English or another language, to Paperpal, which is to be used as the base for your content.

Step 3: Fill in the specifics, such as your field of study, brief description or details you want to include, which will help the AI generate the outline for your Introduction.

Step 4: Use this outline and sentence suggestions to develop your content, adding citations where needed and modifying it to align with your specific research focus.

Step 5: Turn to Paperpal’s granular language checks to refine your content, tailor it to reflect your personal writing style, and ensure it effectively conveys your message.

You can use the same process to develop each section of your article, and finally your research paper in half the time and without any of the stress.

Craft accurate research paper introductions with Paperpal. Start writing now!

The purpose of the research paper introduction is to introduce the reader to the problem definition, justify the need for the study, and describe the main theme of the study. The aim is to gain the reader’s attention by providing them with necessary background information and establishing the main purpose and direction of the research.

The length of the research paper introduction can vary across journals and disciplines. While there are no strict word limits for writing the research paper introduction, an ideal length would be one page, with a maximum of 400 words over 1-4 paragraphs. Generally, it is one of the shorter sections of the paper as the reader is assumed to have at least a reasonable knowledge about the topic. 2 For example, for a study evaluating the role of building design in ensuring fire safety, there is no need to discuss definitions and nature of fire in the introduction; you could start by commenting upon the existing practices for fire safety and how your study will add to the existing knowledge and practice.

When deciding what to include in the research paper introduction, the rest of the paper should also be considered. The aim is to introduce the reader smoothly to the topic and facilitate an easy read without much dependency on external sources. 3 Below is a list of elements you can include to prepare a research paper introduction outline and follow it when you are writing the research paper introduction. Topic introduction: This can include key definitions and a brief history of the topic. Research context and background: Offer the readers some general information and then narrow it down to specific aspects. Details of the research you conducted: A brief literature review can be included to support your arguments or line of thought. Rationale for the study: This establishes the relevance of your study and establishes its importance. Importance of your research: The main contributions are highlighted to help establish the novelty of your study Research hypothesis: Introduce your research question and propose an expected outcome. Organization of the paper: Include a short paragraph of 3-4 sentences that highlights your plan for the entire paper

Cite only works that are most relevant to your topic; as a general rule, you can include one to three. Note that readers want to see evidence of original thinking. So it is better to avoid using too many references as it does not leave much room for your personal standpoint to shine through. Citations in your research paper introduction support the key points, and the number of citations depend on the subject matter and the point discussed. If the research paper introduction is too long or overflowing with citations, it is better to cite a few review articles rather than the individual articles summarized in the review. A good point to remember when citing research papers in the introduction section is to include at least one-third of the references in the introduction.

The literature review plays a significant role in the research paper introduction section. A good literature review accomplishes the following: Introduces the topic – Establishes the study’s significance – Provides an overview of the relevant literature – Provides context for the study using literature – Identifies knowledge gaps However, remember to avoid making the following mistakes when writing a research paper introduction: Do not use studies from the literature review to aggressively support your research Avoid direct quoting Do not allow literature review to be the focus of this section. Instead, the literature review should only aid in setting a foundation for the manuscript.

Remember the following key points for writing a good research paper introduction: 4

• Avoid stuffing too much general information: Avoid including what an average reader would know and include only that information related to the problem being addressed in the research paper introduction. For example, when describing a comparative study of non-traditional methods for mechanical design optimization, information related to the traditional methods and differences between traditional and non-traditional methods would not be relevant. In this case, the introduction for the research paper should begin with the state-of-the-art non-traditional methods and methods to evaluate the efficiency of newly developed algorithms.
• Avoid packing too many references: Cite only the required works in your research paper introduction. The other works can be included in the discussion section to strengthen your findings.
• Avoid extensive criticism of previous studies: Avoid being overly critical of earlier studies while setting the rationale for your study. A better place for this would be the Discussion section, where you can highlight the advantages of your method.
• Avoid describing conclusions of the study: When writing a research paper introduction remember not to include the findings of your study. The aim is to let the readers know what question is being answered. The actual answer should only be given in the Results and Discussion section.

To summarize, the research paper introduction section should be brief yet informative. It should convince the reader the need to conduct the study and motivate him to read further. If you’re feeling stuck or unsure, choose trusted AI academic writing assistants like Paperpal to effortlessly craft your research paper introduction and other sections of your research article.

1. Jawaid, S. A., & Jawaid, M. (2019). How to write introduction and discussion. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 13(Suppl 1), S18.

2. Dewan, P., & Gupta, P. (2016). Writing the title, abstract and introduction: Looks matter!. Indian pediatrics, 53, 235-241.

3. Cetin, S., & Hackam, D. J. (2005). An approach to the writing of a scientific Manuscript1. Journal of Surgical Research, 128(2), 165-167.

4. Bavdekar, S. B. (2015). Writing introduction: Laying the foundations of a research paper. Journal of the Association of Physicians of India, 63(7), 44-6.

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• Scientific Writing Style Guides Explained
• Ethical Research Practices For Research with Human Subjects
• 8 Most Effective Ways to Increase Motivation for Thesis Writing 
• 6 Tips for Post-Doc Researchers to Take Their Career to the Next Level

Practice vs. Practise: Learn the Difference

Academic paraphrasing: why paperpal’s rewrite should be your first choice , you may also like, how to cite in apa format (7th edition):..., how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide), research funding basics: what should a grant proposal..., how to write an abstract in research papers..., how to write dissertation acknowledgements, how to write the first draft of a..., mla works cited page: format, template & examples.

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
• Open access
• Published: 16 September 2024

Food circular economy and safety considerations in waste management of urban manufacturing side streams

• Ying Tong Yeo   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8869-0151 1 ,
• Cia Min Lim   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9536-5816 1 ,
• Alfonso Isaias Vargas Huaco 1 &
• Wei Ning Chen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1111-5076 1 , 2  

npj Science of Food volume  8 , Article number:  65 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Biological techniques

In food circular economy, the utilization of food manufacturing side streams (FMSS) offers significant potential instead of being discarded. However, reincorporating FMSS into the food value chain raises food safety concerns due to potential food hazards. This perspective explores food safety risks associated with circular management of FMSS by using a ‘Quad-Modal hazard dynamic’ approach with case studies. Future research and advancements in food safety control strategies are also discussed.

Similar content being viewed by others

Framework for evaluation of food safety in the circular food system

A framework to quantify mass flow and assess food loss and waste in the US food supply chain

Assessment and scenario hypothesis of food waste in China based on material flow analysis

Introduction.

Food loss and waste (FLW), alongside unsustainable resource use associated with the traditional model of food production and consumption 1 , 2 , as well as its important global environmental and socioeconomic impacts 3 , have outlined the critical need for a paradigm shift in our global resource management strategies 4 . Within this context, the circular economy (CE) has been conceived as a transformative approach focused on the restorative use of resources, emphasizing on efficiency, waste reduction, and sustainability 5 . The global food systems face significant challenges, with an alarming 25–30% of FLW of the total food produced worldwide, contributing to ~8–10% of total anthropogenic GHG emissions and costing about 1 trillion USD per year between 2010 and 2016 3 . The CE model inspires a vision of a food circular economy (FCE) 6 , promising to alleviate the strain on limited resources by endorsing a model of production and consumption, where waste and loss are minimized through the continuous prevention of waste, and the reuse, recycling, and regeneration of resources in a closed-loop system 7 , 8 .

Yet, as we evolve into this transformative landscape towards more sustainable systems, the imperative of food safety cannot be overstated. Significantly, food manufacturing side streams (FMSS) present a growing area of interest for reutilization as viable materials and products that are reinserted into the food supply chain, including valuable food ingredients 9 . However, the reintegration of these substances into the food supply chain potentially carries the inherent risk of introducing chemical, biological, physical hazards and allergens 10 , 11 .

This potential public health concern, while limitedly addressed in literature that primarily focuses on the valorization of side streams 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , remains a crucial discussion on the potential food hazards emerging from their reuse within a FCE framework. However, the comprehensive reviews by Rao et al. 12 , Focker et al. 11 , and Socas-Rodríguez et al. 13 , alongside other related studies, notably bridge this gap by highlighting the valorization of FMSS, addressing the balance between food safety and sustainability, with an orientation to the European Union (EU) context. They establish a foundation in understanding the valorization process’s complexities, particularly emphasizing the importance of food safety, by identifying food hazards related to products derived from food side streams, which will be reissued in different stages of the food supply chain.

As has been explored by the available body of evidence, as the food system moves towards more sustainable and circular models, understanding the full spectrum of food safety risk factors associated with FMSS becomes paramount, including the food hazards dynamics along closed-loop chains. However, as has also been briefly noted, the food safety implications of reintroducing FMSS into the food supply chain expand beyond a hazard-based perspective. This critical overview highlights a pressing need for adopting holistic perspectives on control strategies.

To do so, here we provide our perspective seeking to broaden the discussion on the multiple considerations in the complex interplay of food safety and circular economy principles. Illustrated at a very general level, we discuss the intersections that we envision for the scope of food side streams, via an integrative and food-chain approach. By advocating for a quad-modal approach grounded in the evidence available, we propose to delve into and elucidate some pathways through which food safety hazards in circular systems may emerge, particularly focusing on the reintroduction of FMSS into the food value chain. Enriched with targeted case studies, we seek to not only present some potential food safety risks but also to discuss strategies and interventions that may fortify our food control systems.

Interlink between food safety and food circular economy: a quad-modal approach to describe dynamics of food safety hazards

Within the circular economy (CE) paradigm, waste is avoided and resources are continuously reused, recycled and regenerated in a closed-loop system 5 . In the context of the food circular economy (FCE), these principles will be applied to address sustainability issues associated with FLW throughout the multiple stages of the food supply chain.

As previously reported 14 , there is a high heterogeneity on the definition of FLW, resulting in not only conceptual differences, but also substantial differences in root-causes and driving factors, mitigation strategies and challenges applicable to different types of FLW. This may be led by their inherent nature and characteristics of the waste, the stage of the food chain where they are generated, as well as the specific national context 3 , 14 , 15 . The United Nations built a harmonized conceptual and monitoring framework for FLW, which recognizes differences in the terms of food loss and food waste, establishing scopes based on the stages of the food chain that each covers 16 , 17 , 18 (Table 1 ).

In this article, food manufacturing side streams (FMSS) refer to substances or residual materials generated from primary food production that are not the primary intended food product. These may include waste, by-products, and initially inedible “fragments” as defined in the conceptual framework for FLW proposed by FAO 16 . However, cultural, economic, and technological factors should also be considered when assessing the categorization of these food fragments as edible or inedible. For instance, soybean residue (okara), often viewed as inedible residue of soy beverage or tofu production, is a valued food ingredient in some countries, such as unohana in Japan, kongbiji jjigae in Korea and xiao doufu in China. Considering this, defining side streams based on their production processes may provide a more inclusive approach. In addition, it is also important to note the distinction between side streams and by-products. While side streams encompass a broader category of materials with varying degrees of commercial viability, the term “by-products” is frequently used, often interchangeably with “side streams”, though it is a subset of side streams characterized by their immediate commercial value and are desired products. In this article, we use FMSS to include both materials with current commercial applications and those in the research stage that may hold potential for future utilization.

To narrow our discussion within the established scope of this perspective article, our examination will be focused on the food safety implications related to food loss scope FMSS. Globally, around 14% of food produced, valued at $400 billion per year, is lost during post-harvest up to the point just before retail 19 , reaching over 20% in regions like Central and Southern Asia 16 . In that sense, it is imperative to sustainably manage these food losses and FMSS. Specifically for food loss, some interlinks are distinguished between food safety and the management measures applied. During routine food safety monitoring, several issues can arise from various points of the food supply chain, such as the detection of pathogens or breaks in the cold chain, compromising on food safety and quality and hence generating production discards, which are considered as food loss. This relationship highlights that adhering to general principles of food hygiene 16 is a way to minimize food loss. On the contrary, certain measures applied by food business operators to minimize food loss, such as the excessive use of pesticides and preservatives, may represent practices that compromise food safety.

On the other hand, within the facets of reusing, recycling and regenerating food loss and FMSS in a closed-loop system of FCE, specific food safety implications are also identified. Conventionally used in animal feed and fertilizers, FMSS are increasingly recognized for their potential in the production of materials and compounds, demonstrating the expansive scope of upcycling within the food manufacturing industry 20 , 21 , 22 . Furthermore, the growing interest in converting FMSS into valuable food ingredients, packaging materials, underscores the potential to increase the longevity of these resources while maximizing their value 9 . However, this raises distinct and multifaceted challenges, particularly concerning food safety in the instance where the reintegration of these materials carries the risk of introducing food safety hazard into the food chain 10 , 11 . The intrinsic variability in foods due to diverse factors, including genetic variation, is further compounded in FMSS generated from secondary food processing that have undergone various food processing. This variability imparts FMSS with diverse properties and hazards prior to their reuse (Table 2 ).

To effectively mitigate potential food safety risk associated with these cases, it is essential to recognize the potential and varied dynamics in the occurrence and levels of food safety hazards that could happen throughout the stages of transformation of side streams to by-products that will be reintroduced into the food chain. These dynamics would depend on several factors, such as the occurrence and previous levels of hazards in the raw material, raw material characteristics, reprocessing methods, and handling conditions. Each side stream and by-product have distinctive characteristics that influence their specific considerations for its reuse and consumption. Throughout various stages of reprocessing and rehandling, they undergo transformations, including in food hazard aspects, termed the ‘quad-modal hazard dynamic approach’. This comprises four key modalities through which food safety hazards can evolve in food circular systems, defined in Table 3 .

Figure 1 provides a cohesive illustration of the interconnection between food safety and food loss and FMSS within the framework of a food circular economy. At its core, the diagram represents solely the stages of the food supply chain (highlighted in green tones) where food loss occurs (shown in red tones), and the FMSS are generated. The links with preceding and succeeding stages of the chain are represented in gray. The chain becomes circular via the FCE’s closed-loop approach. Encircling this core, the diagram presents the primary components of the food circular economy in orange. This layer is divided into two primary objectives: preventing food losses at all stages of the supply chain, and the reintroduction of reclaimed food loss and FMSS back into the cycle, highlighting the potential to repurpose valuable food ingredients derived. The outermost layer, in yellow, depicts the crucial considerations for food safety pertinent to each component of the FCE, integrating a quad-modal approach for comprehensive coverage.

The diagram illustrates three key components: (1) Food supply chain segment, represented by gray sectors near the center of the circle. The critical food chain stages from which food loss and FMSS (in red tones) originate are highlighted in dark gray tones. (2) The orange sections represent the components of the circular food economy integrated throughout various stages of the food chain, emphasizing the reintegration of valuable ingredients from FMSS into the food chain through closed-loop systems. (3) The yellow sectors denote considerations for food safety within the context of food circular economy.

Case studies: Assessment of food safety hazards in high-volumeFMSS using the ‘Quad-Modal hazard dynamics’ approach

To illustrate the ‘Quad-Modal hazard dynamics’ approach to evaluate food safety hazards in food circular systems, we assess selected hazards within three FMSS that have gained significance in the food industry due to its large production quantities. By analyzing these FMSS as case studies, we gain critical insights into the complex nature of food safety hazards present in these materials when reintegrated into circular food system. The focus is on discerning the nuanced interplay of chemical, biological, and physical hazards within these FMSS, given their extensive utilization and the consequent potential for widespread impacts on food safety within FCE.

Seafood side streams

Seafood side streams, encompassing large quantities of unused fish and crustacean parts, are rich in high value nutrients like omega-3 fatty acids and proteins 23 , 24 . In fish processing, the side streams constitute a considerable portion of the total weight of fish (~50%), comprising unused parts of the fish such as viscera, heads, trimmings, skin, scale, fin, bone, and damaged or unsuitable fish 25 . These seafood side streams are economical sources of useful ingredients for culinary applications 26 , 27 , 28 . However, reutilizing seafood side streams is not without its food safety challenges, and it necessitates an assessment of the associated food safety hazards that may arise from its reintegration within the FCE. Seafood is subject to various food safety hazards, among which chemical hazards are predominant, and seafood side streams that are reprocessed for foods, feed and supplements are no exception 29 , 30 .

Biogenic amines (BAs) may be introduced into seafood side streams during improper handling, storage, and processing 29 . Seafood side streams are highly perishable, with their quick spoilage driven largely by processes such as microbial metabolism, autolysis, and lipid oxidation 31 . Factors such as higher temperatures can promote the growth and enzymatic activities of decarboxylase-producing bacteria like Enterobacteriaceae , Pseudomonas , and lactic acid bacteria, favoring formation of BAs 32 . In addition, during the processing of the seafood side streams, processes like fermentation can result in increased levels of BAs 33 . In a study of Korean fermented foods by Moon et al. 33 , elevated levels of histamine, a derivative of histidine identified as a key causative toxin of scombroid poisoning, were found to have increased across all tested fermented food samples 29 , 33 . The formation of histamine poses as a food hazard as it cannot be easily eliminated due to its thermal stability 34 .

Accumulation

The bioaccumulation of heavy metals is particularly pronounced in seafood side streams. Some types of fishmeal produced using fish parts that are unsuitable for human consumption, may be fed to farmed finfish and shellfish, leading to the bioaccumulation of contaminants such as methylmercury (MeHg) in muscle 35 . Fishmeal is also often used as feed for poultry and swine, and can lead to significant mercury accumulation in these livestock, exceeding safety limits 36 . Mercury that is present in the feed may then accumulate further in chicken feathers, a poultry side stream often repurposed into feather meal for livestock and aquaculture, thus perpetuating the cycle of contamination within the closed loop of FCE 37 .

Depending on the food processing methods utilized, food safety hazards may be reduced in the process, which is a crucial step in ensuring the safe use of seafood side streams. Techniques like ultrasonic cleaning have proven effective in reducing heavy metals and other contaminants in shellfish side streams, enhancing their suitability for various applications, such as in calcium supplements 38 , 39 . Depending on the technological interventions used for food processing, food safety hazards may be lowered, and hence reducing the need to dispose of waste, aligning with the goals of circular food systems.

Interaction

Besides histamine, the formation of other BAs, notably putrescine and cadaverine, are also closely linked to spoilage of seafood, which can affect the resulting quality of the seafood side streams that would be made into by-products. Putrescine and cadaverine are formed by bacterial decarboxylation of ornithine and lysine, respectively 29 . More importantly, the presence of putrescine and cadaverine can aggravate the toxicity effects of histamine poisoning through synergistic interactions 29 . These BAs have been found to facilitate histamine transport across the intestinal lumen and enhance its absorption, increasing histamine bioavailability, or may inhibit histamine-metabolizing enzymes like diamine oxidase (DAO), leading to reduced histamine breakdown and clearance from the body 40 .

Whey from dairy processing

The dairy industry generates an estimated 180 to 190 million tons of whey each year, a valuable side stream utilized as a by-product derived from cheese and casein-based dairy production 41 . Whey constitutes a substantial proportion of the total milk volume and retains a significant amount of nutrients, such as protein, lactose, minerals and vitamins, making it a nutritious and functional resource for various applications in food and beverage products 42 , 43 .

The repercussions of veterinary drug use in dairy production become increasingly evident in the context of whey utilization 44 . The reliance of the dairy industry on heat treatment to ensure the safety of milk products falls short when it comes to antibiotics. Studies report that the extent of heat degradation, a standard process in milk treatment, is insufficient for removing antibiotic residues 45 . This shortfall means that these substances can remain present despite the heat treatment. The correlation between antibiotic levels in milk and its derivatives such as whey and fresh cheese is remarkably direct. Research indicates that the levels of antibiotics in whey and fresh cheese closely mirror those found in the original milk, with as much as 85.9% of these substances being transferred from the milk source to whey 46 , 47 . This suggests a predictable and consistent contamination of whey when originating from antibiotic-laden milk.

The persistence and transfer of antibiotic residues from milk to whey not only concentrate these substances but also elevate the potential risk of fostering antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Moreover, the acquisition of antimicrobial resistance genes (ARGs) by pathogens through horizontal gene transfer poses severe health and environmental risks 48 . For instance, Fraiture et al.‘s study highlights this concern, identifying ARGs from Bacillus subtilis in a notable percentage of vitamin B2-enriched feed samples 49 . Similarly, the investigation conducted by Lányi et al. into raw milk samples from public markets reveals the alarming presence of various bacterial genetic materials, including complete ARGs 46 . These ARGs have the capacity to compromise the effectiveness of a broad spectrum of antibiotics, including cephalosporin, cephamycin, fluoroquinolone, peptide antibiotics, and tetracycline 46 . The accumulated presence of antibiotic residues in whey, stemming from standard dairy processing practices, emerges as a critical issue. It not only represents a direct threat to food safety but also contributes to the broader, more complex challenge of AMR.

Brewer’s spent grain from breweries

Brewer’s spent grain (BSG) is a significant side stream of the brewing industry, accounting for about 85% of the solid waste generated, reaching an annual production of 39 million tons worldwide 50 . BSG is composed of various valuable components such as hemicellulose, cellulose, lignin, and proteins 51 . Despite its potential value, BSG presents food safety challenges that need to be addressed. For instance, the prevalence of fungal secondary metabolites, namely mycotoxins, in BSG pose as a hazard that might affect human health, due to their toxicity to cause various health issues. Pereyra et al. 52 evaluated the mycotoxins content in 33 brewer’s spent grain samples and found that all the samples are contaminated with fumonisin B1 (FB1) (104 – 145 μg kg -1 ), with 18% of the samples containing aflatoxin B 1 (AFB 1 ) at levels between 19 and 44.52 μg kg −1 52 .

Mycotoxins can also be introduced after its production, due to the fungi contamination. The high moisture and nutritional contents of BSG makes it especially susceptible to microbial growth and spoilage, in particular common fungal species such as Fusarium 53 . This genus is known for producing mycotoxins, including deoxynivalenol (DON) and fumonisins (FBs), which pose significant risks to animal and human health 54 , 55 , 56 . In the study by Penagos-Tabares et al., compounds like Zearalenone (ZEA), T-2, and HT-2 toxins were detected, even though they were found to be below European maximum limits for animal feeds 57 , 58 . Their persistent presence, however, is a stark reminder of the potential dangers if accumulated. BSG may initially meet acceptable standards for food use, however its microbial profile is subject to rapid alteration post-production, characterized by increases in microaerophilic bacteria and anaerobes 59 . Particularly disturbing are the high levels of Penicillium-derived metabolites, often indicative of post-production contamination during storage, which exacerbate the already serious issue of toxin accumulation 58 .

Grains, which serve as the raw materials for the brewery industry, are frequently contaminated with mycotoxins. However, the concentration of mycotoxins in beer is usually reduced as they are primarily absorbed and accumulated in the spent grains during the brewing process 60 . This was also corroborated by another study, in which 60% of the ZEA and 18% of the 15-acetyldeoxynivalenol (15-ADON) presented on the malt grist before the brewing process were found remaining in the spent grains 61 . Cumulatively, the gradual accumulation of mycotoxins in brewer’s spent grain, together with the newly produced mycotoxins after BSG production, can escalate to concentrations that pose acute health risks, underscoring the necessity for continuous monitoring and strict control measures in the management of BSG.

Interestingly, research indicates that biological detoxification can effectively reduce the production and concentration of mycotoxin. Gomaa et al. demonstrated the ability of lactic acid bacteria, Lactobacillus brevis , to reduce the production of aflatoxin B 1 by Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus , by 96.31% and 90.43% 62 . Luz et al. successfully reduced ochratoxin A (OTA) by 97% and 95% using Lactobacillus rhamnosus and Lactobacillus plantarum 63 . Several cutting-edge technologies, such as cold plasma, moderate electric field (MEF), pulsed electric field (PEF), ultrasound, and ohmic heating, have shown significant positive outcomes together with fermentation for mycotoxin detoxification, suggesting these technologies may interact synergistically to degrade mycotoxins in food 64 .

BSG is likely to be co-contaminated by several mycotoxins during complex processing and storage. The interaction between different mycotoxins might result in more severe toxic effects than exposure to individual mycotoxin. The simultaneous presence of, AFB 1 and ZEA, or, AFB 1 and DON, in agricultural products, for example, could be more hepatotoxic than either mycotoxin acting alone 65 .

Overall, these case studies of high-volume FMSS demonstrate that while these resources present a valuable opportunity for resource reutilization in circular food systems, they require a good assessment and understanding of the potential food safety hazards arising from food circularity. The ‘Quad-Modal hazard dynamics’ offers a structured approach to identify, characterize, and therefore able to manage these hazards through a targeted manner, ensuring the safe integration of FMSS into the food value chain while aligning with the principles of a sustainable circular economy.

Food control implications and advancing research on food safety risk in food circular economy: A critical imperative

In the transition towards a circular food economy, aimed at sustainability and resource efficiency, the various aspects of food safety that we have described, particularly the multiple dynamics that food safety hazards could experience, underscore the critical need for a deeper understanding of these phenomena. Based on this, tailoring appropriate approaches to mitigate food safety risks associated with food loss and waste (FLW) across diverse stages of the food supply chain is imperative. These insights, grounded in scientific evidence and a risk-based perspective, are pivotal for developing effective food control strategies to ensure food safety within circular economy frameworks.

As highlighted in previous studies 11 , 12 , 13 , food safety challenges inherent in FCE practices remain inadequately understood or addressed, particularly in the reuse of food side streams for food ingredient purposes. While the reuse of these side streams within the food supply chain effectively reduces losses, it also may pose a risk of (re)introducing contaminants into the food stream. Our ‘Quad-Modal hazard dynamic’ approach aims to illustrate that the occurrence and concentration levels of both new and pre-existing contaminants in raw materials depend largely on the nature and composition of the food Table 4 by-products, the processes employed to transform them into food ingredients, and the hygiene conditions maintained by operators during these processes. These dynamics of food hazards within the closed-loop section of the FCE model contribute to the complexities of ensuring effective food safety control measures.

From a food control standpoint, competent authorities and partners can build up on the insights provided here to develop food control strategies tailored to the needs of more sustainable food systems. Adhering to international risk analysis principles for food safety, hazard assessment investigations must meticulously identify and evaluate these hazard dynamics, with particular attention to potential new hazards. This involves comprehensively understanding the adverse health effects associated with these agents and characterizing the relationship between dosage and the likelihood of adverse effects occurring. However, to advance comprehensive risk-based control measures, other elements of risk assessment and management, as well as other food control aspects. Table 5 provides examples demonstrating how these food safety control elements can integrate the quad-modal approach to understanding the dynamics of food safety hazards, along with other pertinent considerations.

Likewise, the scientific community should engage in rigorous research that examines the entire lifecycle of these by-products within circular systems. The research should focus on understanding how processing, storage, and handling in circular systems contribute to the safety profiles of these FMSS. There is a pressing need to develop and validate new methodologies for contaminant detection and quantification, assessing current decontamination techniques, and exploring innovative approaches to manage these food safety hazards. Furthermore, with better understanding of the food safety hazards, research into the integration of advanced food processing technologies like High Pressure Processing (HPP), Pulsed Electric Fields (PEF), and Atmospheric Cold Plasma (ACP) can offer promising technological solutions to minimize waste within food circular systems, through their capabilities of reducing microbiological activity, chemical contaminants, and food allergens in food products 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 . These technologies, alongside advanced detection methods like Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS), quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR), utility of stable isotopes, and various spectroscopy techniques, provide comprehensive tools for tracking and monitoring changes in FMSS in the context of food safety 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 . The use of biosensors for real-time monitoring and the combination of multiple detection technologies with chemometric and omics approaches, augmented by artificial intelligence, present innovative avenues for detecting food hazards 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 .

By undertaking this crucial research, the scientific community can provide indispensable insights and guidelines that will aid policymakers, industry stakeholders, and regulatory bodies in harmonizing sustainability goals with uncompromised food safety in circular economy food systems. This alignment is essential for the sustainable and safe growth of our global food systems, ensuring that our pursuit of environmental sustainability goes hand in hand with the protection of public health.

Concluding remarks

This perspective article has examined the interlink between food safety and food circular economy model, with emphasis on the complexities of food hazards dynamic that can occur in the reuse of food manufacturing side streams (FMSS) and their reintegration into the supply food chain.

The transition towards circularity in food systems via the reprocessing of food manufacturing side streams and by-products holds significant promise for waste reduction, resource conservation, and the promotion of more sustainable consumption and production patterns. However, to ensure the success of this transition, it is crucial to thoroughly understand the complexities potential occurrences and harmful alterations of the hazard levels associated with these reprocessing practices. The proposed quad-modal approach addresses these food safety hazards dynamics by describing their potential modalities of introduction, accumulation, reduction, and interaction. This underscores the critical need for a deeper understanding and developing effective management strategies for potential food safety risks to ensure the safety and sustainability of food systems. These strategies should encompass rigorous hazard assessment, but should also address appropriate exposure assessments, risk characterization, and proactive risk management practices. Based on this, the competent authorities must deploy appropriate actions to control food safety, which must be applied within the framework of the food circular economy.

Future research should focus on the compositional changes and risks associated with reprocessing food manufacturing side streams, to develop safer and more efficient processing techniques. The advancement of new detection, monitoring, and analysis technologies will also be essential for assessing and managing risks and ensuring food safety.

As we advance our understanding and implementation of circular food systems, it becomes clear that the goals of environmental sustainability and food safety are not only compatible, but are integral, complementary pillars essential for building a truly sustainable food system. Therefore, we call upon industry stakeholders, policymakers, and researchers to unite in their efforts to innovate on robust solutions that not only advance sustainable food system objectives but also ensure the safety and well-being of consumers. Through such collaborative efforts, we can craft a food system that upholds the principles of sustainability while safeguarding public health, thereby achieving a sustainable future for all.

Independent Group of Scientists appointed by the Secretary-General. Global Sustainable Development Report 2019: The Future Is Now—Science for Achieving Sustainable Development. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/24797GSDR_report_2019.pdf . (2019).

Campbell, B. M. et al. Agriculture production as a major driver of the earth system exceeding planetary boundaries. Ecol. Soc . 22 , 4 (2017).

Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change. Food security. In Climate Change and Land: IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security, and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems. (eds. Delmotte, V. M. et al.) 896 (Cambridge University Press, 2022).

United Nations. Secretary-General’s Chair Summary and Statement of Action on the UN Food Systems Summit. https://www.un.org/en/food-systems-summit/news/making-food-systems-work-people-planet-and-prosperity . (2021).

Ellen Macarthur Foundation. Towards the Circular Economy Vol. 1: An Economic and Business Rationale For An Accelerated Transition. https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/towards-the-circular-economy-vol-1-an-economic-and-business-rationale-for-an (2023).

Gonçalves, M. L. M. B. B. & Maximo, G. J. Circular economy in the food chain: production, processing and waste management. Circ. Econ. Sustain. 3 , 1405–1423 (2023).

Article   Google Scholar  

Bjørnbet, M. M., Skaar, C., Fet, A. M. & Schulte, K. Ø. Circular economy in manufacturing companies: a review of case study literature. J. Clean. Prod. 294 , 126268 (2021).

Zhang, Q., Dhir, A. & Kaur, P. Circular economy and the food sector: a systematic literature review. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 32 , 655–668 (2022).

van Zanten, H. H. E. et al. Circularity in Europe strengthens the sustainability of the global food system. Nat. Food 4 , 320–330 (2023).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Kaza, S., Yao, L., Bhada-Tata, P. & Woerden, F. V. What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/30317 (2018).

Focker, M. et al. Review of food safety hazards in circular food systems in Europe. Food Res. Int. 158 , 111505 (2022).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Rao, M., Bast, A. & de Boer, A. Valorized food processing by-products in the EU: finding the balance between safety, nutrition, and sustainability. Sustainability 13 , 4428 (2021).

Socas-Rodríguez, B., Álvarez-Rivera, G., Valdés, A., Ibáñez, E. & Cifuentes, A. Food by-products and food wastes: are they safe enough for their valorization? Trends Food Sci. Technol. 114 , 133–147 (2021).

Dora, M., Biswas, S., Choudhary, S., Nayak, R. & Irani, Z. A system-wide interdisciplinary conceptual framework for food loss and waste mitigation strategies in the supply chain. Ind. Mark. Manag. 93 , 492–508 (2021).

Lipinski, B. et al. Reducing Food Loss and Waste ; Installment 2 of Creating a Sustainable Food Future; Working Paper . https://www.wri.org/research/reducing-food-loss-and-waste (2013).

FAO. The State of Food and Agriculture. Moving Forward on Food Loss and Waste Reduction ; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://www.fao.org/3/ca6030en/ca6030en.pdf (2019).

United Nations Environment Programme. UNEP Food Waste Index Report 2021. http://www.unep.org/resources/report/unep-food-waste-index-report-2021 (2021).

United Nation General Assembly. Global Indicator Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals and Targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/Global-Indicator-Framework-after-2024-refinement-English.pdf . (2017).

FAO. Food Loss and Waste Database . Technical Platform on the Measurement and Reduction of Food Loss and Waste. https://www.fao.org/platform-food-loss-waste/flw-data/en (2024).

Ru, H. et al. Bean-dreg-derived garbon materials used as superior anode material for lithium-ion batteries. Electrochim. Acta 222 , 551–560 (2016).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Le, T. A. N., Lee, J. J. L. & Chen, W. N. Stimulation of lactic acid production and lactobacillus plantarum growth in the coculture with bacillus subtilis using jackfruit seed starch. J. Funct. Foods 104 , 105535 (2023).

Koller, M., Atlić, A., Gonzalez-Garcia, Y., Kutschera, C. & Braunegg, G. Polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) biosynthesis from Whey lactose. Macromol. Symp. 272 , 87–92 (2008).

Rubio-Rodríguez, N. et al. Supercritical fluid extraction of the omega-3 rich oil contained in hake (Merluccius capensis–Merluccius paradoxus) by-products: study of the influence of process parameters on the extraction yield and oil quality. J. Supercrit. Fluids 47 , 215–226 (2008).

Abuine, R., Rathnayake, A. U. & Byun, H.-G. Biological activity of peptides purified from fish skin hHydrolysates. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 22 , 10 (2019).

Olsen, R. L., Toppe, J. & Karunasagar, I. Challenges and realistic opportunities in the use of by-products from processing of fish and shellfish. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 36 , 144–151 (2014).

Calvarro, J., Perez-Palacios, T. & Ruiz, J. Modification of gelatin functionality for culinary applications by using transglutaminase. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 5–6 , 27–32 (2016).

Huang, S. et al. Pectin stabilized fish gelatin emulsions: physical stability, rheological, and interaction properties. Front. Nutr. 9 , 961875 (2022).

Pal, G. K. & Suresh, P. V. Sustainable valorisation of seafood by-products: recovery of collagen and development of collagen-based novel functional food ingredients. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 37 , 201–215 (2016).

Visciano, P., Schirone, M. & Paparella, A. An overview of histamine and other biogenic amines in fish and fish products. Foods 9 , 1795 (2020).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Djedjibegovic, J. et al. Heavy metals in commercial fish and seafood products and risk assessment in adult population in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sci. Rep. 10 , 13238 (2020).

Prabhakar, P. K., Vatsa, S., Srivastav, P. P. & Pathak, S. S. A comprehensive review on freshness of fish and assessment: analytical methods and recent innovations. Food Res. Int. 133 , 109157 (2020).

Ramakrishna Reddy, P., Kumar, S. H., Layana, P. & Nayak, B. B. Survival and histamine production by histamine-forming bacteria exposed to low doses of gamma irradiation. J. Food Prot. 83 , 1163–1166 (2020).

Moon, J. S. et al. Analysis of biogenic amines in fermented fish products consumed in Korea. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 19 , 1689–1692 (2010).

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls . https://www.fda.gov (2024).

Mahaffey, K. R., Clickner, R. P. & Jeffries, R. A. Methylmercury and omega-3 fatty acids: co-occurrence of dietary sources with emphasis on fish and shellfish. Environ. Res. 107 , 20–29 (2008).

Shah, A. Q. et al. Determination of total mercury in chicken feed, its translocation to different tissues of chicken and their manure using cold vapour atomic absorption spectrometer. Food Chem. Toxicol. 48 , 1550–1554 (2010).

Gatt, M. C. et al. Untangling causes of variation in mercury concentration between flight feathers. Environ. Pollut. 269 , 116105 (2021).

Hasan, M. R., Abdullah, C. A. C., Afizah, M. N., Ghazali, M. S. M. & Noranizan, M. A. Efficacy of ultrasonic cleaning on cockle shells. J. Food Eng. 352 , 111523 (2023).

Ding, H., Lv, L., Wang, Z. & Liu, L. Study on the “glutamic acid-enzymolysis” process for extracting chitin from crab shell waste and its by-product recovery. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 190 , 1074–1091 (2020).

del Rio, B. et al. The biogenic amines putrescine and cadaverine show in vitro cytotoxicity at concentrations that can be found in foods. Sci. Rep. 9 , 120 (2019).

Chandrapala, J. et al. Properties of acid whey as a function of pH and temperature. J. Dairy Sci. 98 , 4352–4363 (2015).

Ryan, M. P. & Walsh, G. The biotechnological potential of whey. Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 15 , 479–498 (2016).

Zandona, E., Blažić, M. & Jambrak, A. R. Whey utilization: sustainable uses and environmental approach. Food Technol. Biotechnol. 59 , 147–161 (2021).

Chowdhury, S., Kim, G.-H., Bolan, N. & Longhurst, P. A critical review on risk evaluation and hazardous management in Carcass Burial. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 123 , 272–288 (2019).

Tóth, A. G. et al. Antimicrobial resistance genes in raw milk for human consumption. Sci. Rep. 10 , 7464 (2020).

Lányi, K. et al. Transfer of certain beta-lactam antibiotics from cow’s milk to fresh cheese and whey. Food Addit. Contam. Part A 39 , 52–60 (2022).

Giraldo, J., Igualada, C., Cabizza, R., Althaus, R. L. & Beltrán, M. C. Transfer of antibiotics from goat’s milk to rennet curd and whey fractions during cheese-making. Food Chem. 392 , 133218 (2022).

Sun, D., Jeannot, K., Xiao, Y. & Knapp, C. W. Editorial: Horizontal gene transfer mediated bacterial antibiotic resistance. Front. Microbiol. 10 , 1933 (2019).

Fraiture, M.-A., Deckers, M., Papazova, N. & Roosens, N. H. C. Detection strategy targeting a chloramphenicol resistance gene from genetically modified bacteria in food and feed products. Food Control 108 , 106873 (2020).

Lynch, K. M., Steffen, E. J. & Arendt, E. K. Brewers’ spent grain: a review with an emphasis on food and health. J. Inst. Brew. 122 , 553–568 (2016).

Zeko-Pivač, A. et al. The potential of Brewer’s spent grain in the circular bioeconomy: state of the art and future perspectives. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 10 , 870744 (2022).

Pereyra, M. L. G., Rosa, Ca. R., Dalcero, A. M. & Cavaglieri, L. R. Mycobiota and mycotoxins in malted barley and Brewer’s spent grain from Argentinean breweries. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 53 , 649–655 (2011).

Mastanjević, K. et al. Multi-(Myco)toxins in malting and brewing by-products. Toxins 11 , 30 (2019).

Shephard, G. S. Impact of mycotoxins on human health in developing countries. Food Addit. Contam. Part A 25 , 146–151 (2008).

Pierron, A., Alassane-Kpembi, I. & Oswald, I. P. Impact of two mycotoxins deoxynivalenol and fumonisin on pig intestinal health. Porc. Health Manag. 2 , 21 (2016).

Koletsi, P. et al. Individual and combined effects of deoxynivalenol (DON) with other fusarium mycotoxins on rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) growth performance and health. Mycotoxin Res. 39 , 405–420 (2023).

González, P. A. et al. Comparative analysis of mycotoxin, pesticide, and elemental content of Canarian craft and Spanish mainstream beers. Toxicol. Rep. 10 , 389–399 (2023).

Penagos-Tabares, F. et al. Mixtures of mycotoxins, phytoestrogens and pesticides co-occurring in wet spent brewery grains (BSG) intended for dairy cattle feeding in Austria. Food Addit. Contam. Part A 39 , 1855–1877 (2022).

Robertson, J. A. et al. Profiling Brewers’ spent grain for composition and microbial ecology at the site of production. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 43 , 890–896 (2010).

Inoue, T., Nagatomi, Y., Uyama, A. & Mochizuki, N. Fate of mycotoxins during beer brewing and fermentation. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 77 , 1410–1415 (2013).

Schwarz, P. B., Casper, H. H., Beattie, S. Fate and development of naturally occurring fusarium mycotoxins during malting and brewing1. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem . 53 , 121–127 (1995).

Gomaa, E. Z., Abdelall, M. F. & El-Mahdy, O. M. Detoxification of aflatoxin B1 by antifungal compounds from lactobacillus brevis and lactobacillus paracasei, isolated from dairy products. Probiotics Antimicrob. Proteins 10 , 201–209 (2018).

Luz, C., Ferrer, J., Mañes, J. & Meca, G. Toxicity reduction of ochratoxin A by lactic acid bacteria. Food Chem. Toxicol. 112 , 60–66 (2018).

Gavahian, M., Mathad, G. N., Oliveira, C. A. F. & Mousavi Khaneghah, A. Combinations of emerging technologies with fermentation: interaction effects for detoxification of mycotoxins? Food Res. Int. 141 , 110104 (2021).

Sun, L.-H. et al. Individual and combined cytotoxic effects of aflatoxin B1, zearalenone, deoxynivalenol and fumonisin B1 on BRL 3A rat liver cells. Toxicon 95 , 6–12 (2015).

Aaby, K., Grimsbo, I. H., Hovda, M. B. & Rode, T. M. Effect of high pressure and thermal processing on shelf life and quality of strawberry purée and juice. Food Chem. 260 , 115–123 (2018).

Koo, A., Chew, D. X., Ghate, V. & Zhou, W. Residual polyphenol oxidase and peroxidase activities in high pressure processed bok choy (Brassica Rapa Subsp. Chinensis) juice did not accelerate nutrient degradation during storage. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 84 , 103284 (2023).

Dziadek, K. et al. Effect of pulsed electric field treatment on shelf life and nutritional value of apple juice. J. Food Sci. Technol. 56 , 1184–1191 (2019).

Genovese, J. et al. Important factors to consider for acrylamide mitigation in potato crisps using pulsed electric fields. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 55 , 18–26 (2019).

Misra, N. N. et al. In-package nonthermal plasma degradation of pesticides on fresh produce. J. Hazard. Mater. 271 , 33–40 (2014).

Wielogorska, E. et al. A holistic study to understand the detoxification of mycotoxins in maize and impact on its molecular integrity using cold atmospheric plasma treatment. Food Chem. 301 , 125281 (2019).

Jagadeesan, B. et al. The use of next generation sequencing for improving food safety: translation into practice. Food Microbiol 79 , 96–115 (2019).

Hodzic, E., Glavinic, A. & Wademan, C. A novel approach for simultaneous detection of the most common food-borne pathogens by multiplex qPCR. Biomol. Biomed. 23 , 640–648 (2023).

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Contreras-Chavez, R. et al. Optimization of acetylated starch films from purple sweet potato: effect of glycerol, carboxymethylcellulose, and stearic acid. Mater. Res. Express 8 , 115101 (2021).

Zheng, S.-Y. et al. Near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy-based fast versicolorin A detection in maize for early aflatoxin warning and safety sorting. Food Chem. 332 , 127419 (2020).

Sun, Y., Tang, H., Zou, X., Meng, G. & Wu, N. Raman spectroscopy for food quality assurance and safety monitoring: a review. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 47 , 100910 (2022).

Lim, C. M., Carey, M., Williams, P. N. & Koidis, A. Rapid classification of commercial teas according to their origin and type using elemental content with X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectroscopy. Curr. Res. Food Sci. 4 , 45–52 (2021).

Cook, P. W. & Nightingale, K. K. Use of omics methods for the advancement of food quality and food safety. Anim. Front. 8 , 33–41 (2018).

Su, G., Yu, C., Liang, S., Wang, W. & Wang, H. Multi-omics in food safety and authenticity in terms of food components. Food Chem. 437 , 137943 (2024).

Zarezadeh, M. R., Aboonajmi, M. & Ghasemi-Varnamkhasti, M. The effect of data fusion on improving the accuracy of olive oil quality measurement. Food Chem. X 18 , 100622 (2023).

Ghasemi-Varnamkhasti, M., Apetrei, C., Lozano, J. & Anyogu, A. Potential use of electronic noses, electronic tongues and biosensors as multisensor systems for spoilage examination in foods. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 80 , 71–92 (2018).

Bolarinwa, I. F., Orfila, C. & Morgan, M. R. A. Amygdalin content of seeds, kernels and food products commercially-available in the UK. Food Chem. 152 , 133–139 (2014).

Mäder, J., Rawel, H. & Kroh, L. W. Composition of phenolic compounds and glycoalkaloids α-solanine and α-chaconine during commercial potato processing. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57 , 6292–6297 (2009).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Beretta, B., Gaiaschi, A., Galli, C. L. & Restani, P. Patulin in apple-based foods: occurrence and safety evaluation. Food Addit. Contam. 17 , 399–406 (2000).

Naman, M., Masoodi, F. A., Wani, S. M. & Ahad, T. Changes in concentration of pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables during household processing. Toxicol. Rep. 9 , 1419–1425 (2022).

Balinova, A. M., Mladenova, R. I. & Shtereva, D. D. Effects of processing on pesticide residues in peaches intended for baby food. Food Addit. Contam. 23 , 895–901 (2006).

Lau, K. Q., Sabran, M. R. & Shafie, S. R. Utilization of vegetable and fruit by-products as functional ingredient and food. Front. Nutr. 8 , 661693 (2021).

Canteri-Schemin, M. H., Fertonani, H. C. R., Waszczynskyj, N. & Wosiacki, G. Extraction of pectin from apple pomace. Braz. Arch. Biol. Technol. 48 , 259–266 (2005).

Gowe, C. Review on Potential Use of Fruit and Vegetables By-Products as A Valuable Source of Natural Food Additives . https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234684145.pdf (2015).

Vong, W. C. & Liu, S.-Q. Biovalorisation of okara (Soybean Residue) for food and nutrition. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 52 , 139–147 (2016).

Feng, J.-Y. et al. Evolution of okara from waste to value added food ingredient: an account of its bio-valorization for improved nutritional and functional effects. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 116 , 669–680 (2021).

Amlund, H., Berntssen, M. H. G., Lunestad, B. T. & Lundebye, A. K. 10 - aquaculture feed contamination by persistent organic pollutants, heavy metals, additives and drug residues. In Animal Feed Contamination. (ed. Gremmels, F. J.) 205–229 (Woodhead Publishing Series, 2012).

Yuan, Z., Ye, X., Hou, Z. & Chen, S. Sustainable utilization of proteins from fish processing by-products: extraction, biological activities and applications. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 143 , 104276 (2024).

Hou, E.-J., Huang, C.-S., Lee, Y.-C., Han, Y.-S. & Chu, H.-T. A method for the process of collagen modified polyester from fish scales waste. MethodsX 9 , 101636 (2022).

Aquino, L. F. M. Cde et al. Mercury content in whey protein and potential risk for human health. J. Food Compos. Anal. 59 , 141–144 (2017).

Elgammal, S. M., Khorshed, M. A. & Ismail, E. H. Determination of heavy metal content in whey protein samples from markets in Giza, Egypt, using inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry and graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry: a probabilistic risk assessment study. J. Food Compos. Anal. 84 , 103300 (2019).

Buchanan, D., Martindale, W., Romeih, E. & Hebishy, E. Recent advances in whey processing and valorisation: technological and environmental perspectives. Int. J. Dairy Technol. 76 , 291–312 (2023).

Berntssen, M. H. G. et al. Dietary beauvericin and enniatin B exposure cause different adverse health effects in farmed Atlantic salmon. Food Chem. Toxicol. 174 , 113648 (2023).

Vaclavikova, M. et al. ‘Emerging’ mycotoxins in cereals processing chains: changes of enniatins during beer and bread making. Food Chem. 136 , 750–757 (2013).

Hu, L., Gastl, M., Linkmeyer, A., Hess, M. & Rychlik, M. Fate of enniatins and beauvericin during the malting and brewing process determined by stable isotope dilution assays. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 56 , 469–477 (2014).

Ferreira, I. M. P. L. V. O., Pinho, O., Vieira, E. & Tavarela, J. G. Brewer’s saccharomyces yeast biomass: characteristics and potential applications. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 21 , 77–84 (2010).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank FoodTech@NTU from Nanyang Technological University, and Singapore Future Ready Food Safety Hub (FRESH) for funding support.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, 637459, Singapore

Ying Tong Yeo, Cia Min Lim, Alfonso Isaias Vargas Huaco & Wei Ning Chen

Singapore Future Ready Food Safety Hub, 50 Nanyang Avenue, N1, B3C-41, Singapore, 639798, Singapore

Wei Ning Chen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization—W.N.C., Y.T.Y., and C.M.L. Writing—original draft—Y.T.Y. and C.M.L. Writing—review and editing—Y.T.Y., C.M.L., and A.H. Visualization—Y.T.Y., C.M.L., and A.H. Supervision—W.N.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wei Ning Chen .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Additional information

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

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Yeo, Y.T., Lim, C.M., Huaco, A.I.V. et al. Food circular economy and safety considerations in waste management of urban manufacturing side streams. npj Sci Food 8 , 65 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-024-00309-3

Download citation

Received : 06 July 2023

Accepted : 06 September 2024

Published : 16 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-024-00309-3

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: Translational Research newsletter — top stories in biotechnology, drug discovery and pharma.

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

Research Methods | Definitions, Types, Examples

Research methods are specific procedures for collecting and analyzing data. Developing your research methods is an integral part of your research design . When planning your methods, there are two key decisions you will make.

First, decide how you will collect data . Your methods depend on what type of data you need to answer your research question :

• Qualitative vs. quantitative : Will your data take the form of words or numbers?
• Primary vs. secondary : Will you collect original data yourself, or will you use data that has already been collected by someone else?
• Descriptive vs. experimental : Will you take measurements of something as it is, or will you perform an experiment?

Second, decide how you will analyze the data .

• For quantitative data, you can use statistical analysis methods to test relationships between variables.
• For qualitative data, you can use methods such as thematic analysis to interpret patterns and meanings in the data.

Table of contents

Methods for collecting data, examples of data collection methods, methods for analyzing data, examples of data analysis methods, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research methods.

Data is the information that you collect for the purposes of answering your research question . The type of data you need depends on the aims of your research.

Qualitative vs. quantitative data

Your choice of qualitative or quantitative data collection depends on the type of knowledge you want to develop.

For questions about ideas, experiences and meanings, or to study something that can’t be described numerically, collect qualitative data .

If you want to develop a more mechanistic understanding of a topic, or your research involves hypothesis testing , collect quantitative data .

You can also take a mixed methods approach , where you use both qualitative and quantitative research methods.

Primary vs. secondary research

Primary research is any original data that you collect yourself for the purposes of answering your research question (e.g. through surveys , observations and experiments ). Secondary research is data that has already been collected by other researchers (e.g. in a government census or previous scientific studies).

If you are exploring a novel research question, you’ll probably need to collect primary data . But if you want to synthesize existing knowledge, analyze historical trends, or identify patterns on a large scale, secondary data might be a better choice.

Descriptive vs. experimental data

In descriptive research , you collect data about your study subject without intervening. The validity of your research will depend on your sampling method .

In experimental research , you systematically intervene in a process and measure the outcome. The validity of your research will depend on your experimental design .

To conduct an experiment, you need to be able to vary your independent variable , precisely measure your dependent variable, and control for confounding variables . If it’s practically and ethically possible, this method is the best choice for answering questions about cause and effect.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Your data analysis methods will depend on the type of data you collect and how you prepare it for analysis.

Data can often be analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. For example, survey responses could be analyzed qualitatively by studying the meanings of responses or quantitatively by studying the frequencies of responses.

Qualitative analysis methods

Qualitative analysis is used to understand words, ideas, and experiences. You can use it to interpret data that was collected:

• From open-ended surveys and interviews , literature reviews , case studies , ethnographies , and other sources that use text rather than numbers.
• Using non-probability sampling methods .

Qualitative analysis tends to be quite flexible and relies on the researcher’s judgement, so you have to reflect carefully on your choices and assumptions and be careful to avoid research bias .

Quantitative analysis methods

Quantitative analysis uses numbers and statistics to understand frequencies, averages and correlations (in descriptive studies) or cause-and-effect relationships (in experiments).

You can use quantitative analysis to interpret data that was collected either:

• During an experiment .
• Using probability sampling methods .

Because the data is collected and analyzed in a statistically valid way, the results of quantitative analysis can be easily standardized and shared among researchers.

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.

• Chi square test of independence
• Statistical power
• Descriptive statistics
• Degrees of freedom
• Pearson correlation
• Null hypothesis
• Double-blind study
• Case-control study
• Research ethics
• Data collection
• Hypothesis testing
• Structured interviews

Research bias

• Hawthorne effect
• Unconscious bias
• Recall bias
• Halo effect
• Self-serving bias
• Information bias

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses . Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experiences in more detail.

In mixed methods research , you use both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods to answer your research question .

A sample is a subset of individuals from a larger population . Sampling means selecting the group that you will actually collect data from in your research. For example, if you are researching the opinions of students in your university, you could survey a sample of 100 students.

In statistics, sampling allows you to test a hypothesis about the characteristics of a population.

The research methods you use depend on the type of data you need to answer your research question .

• If you want to measure something or test a hypothesis , use quantitative methods . If you want to explore ideas, thoughts and meanings, use qualitative methods .
• If you want to analyze a large amount of readily-available data, use secondary data. If you want data specific to your purposes with control over how it is generated, collect primary data.
• If you want to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables , use experimental methods. If you want to understand the characteristics of a research subject, use descriptive methods.

Methodology refers to the overarching strategy and rationale of your research project . It involves studying the methods used in your field and the theories or principles behind them, in order to develop an approach that matches your objectives.

Methods are the specific tools and procedures you use to collect and analyze data (for example, experiments, surveys , and statistical tests ).

In shorter scientific papers, where the aim is to report the findings of a specific study, you might simply describe what you did in a methods section .

In a longer or more complex research project, such as a thesis or dissertation , you will probably include a methodology section , where you explain your approach to answering the research questions and cite relevant sources to support your choice of methods.

Is this article helpful?

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples.

• What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples
• Data Collection | Definition, Methods & Examples

More interesting articles

• Between-Subjects Design | Examples, Pros, & Cons
• Cluster Sampling | A Simple Step-by-Step Guide with Examples
• Confounding Variables | Definition, Examples & Controls
• Construct Validity | Definition, Types, & Examples
• Content Analysis | Guide, Methods & Examples
• Control Groups and Treatment Groups | Uses & Examples
• Control Variables | What Are They & Why Do They Matter?
• Correlation vs. Causation | Difference, Designs & Examples
• Correlational Research | When & How to Use
• Critical Discourse Analysis | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Cross-Sectional Study | Definition, Uses & Examples
• Descriptive Research | Definition, Types, Methods & Examples
• Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples
• Explanatory and Response Variables | Definitions & Examples
• Explanatory Research | Definition, Guide, & Examples
• Exploratory Research | Definition, Guide, & Examples
• External Validity | Definition, Types, Threats & Examples
• Extraneous Variables | Examples, Types & Controls
• Guide to Experimental Design | Overview, Steps, & Examples
• How Do You Incorporate an Interview into a Dissertation? | Tips
• How to Do Thematic Analysis | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples
• How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates
• How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples
• Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria | Examples & Definition
• Independent vs. Dependent Variables | Definition & Examples
• Inductive Reasoning | Types, Examples, Explanation
• Inductive vs. Deductive Research Approach | Steps & Examples
• Internal Validity in Research | Definition, Threats, & Examples
• Internal vs. External Validity | Understanding Differences & Threats
• Longitudinal Study | Definition, Approaches & Examples
• Mediator vs. Moderator Variables | Differences & Examples
• Mixed Methods Research | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Multistage Sampling | Introductory Guide & Examples
• Naturalistic Observation | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Operationalization | A Guide with Examples, Pros & Cons
• Population vs. Sample | Definitions, Differences & Examples
• Primary Research | Definition, Types, & Examples
• Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research | Differences, Examples & Methods
• Quasi-Experimental Design | Definition, Types & Examples
• Questionnaire Design | Methods, Question Types & Examples
• Random Assignment in Experiments | Introduction & Examples
• Random vs. Systematic Error | Definition & Examples
• Reliability vs. Validity in Research | Difference, Types and Examples
• Reproducibility vs Replicability | Difference & Examples
• Reproducibility vs. Replicability | Difference & Examples
• Sampling Methods | Types, Techniques & Examples
• Semi-Structured Interview | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Simple Random Sampling | Definition, Steps & Examples
• Single, Double, & Triple Blind Study | Definition & Examples
• Stratified Sampling | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Structured Interview | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Survey Research | Definition, Examples & Methods
• Systematic Review | Definition, Example, & Guide
• Systematic Sampling | A Step-by-Step Guide with Examples
• Textual Analysis | Guide, 3 Approaches & Examples
• The 4 Types of Reliability in Research | Definitions & Examples
• The 4 Types of Validity in Research | Definitions & Examples
• Transcribing an Interview | 5 Steps & Transcription Software
• Triangulation in Research | Guide, Types, Examples
• Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples
• Types of Research Designs Compared | Guide & Examples
• Types of Variables in Research & Statistics | Examples
• Unstructured Interview | Definition, Guide & Examples
• What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods
• What Is a Case-Control Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is a Cohort Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is a Conceptual Framework? | Tips & Examples
• What Is a Controlled Experiment? | Definitions & Examples
• What Is a Double-Barreled Question?
• What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples
• What Is a Likert Scale? | Guide & Examples
• What Is a Prospective Cohort Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is a Retrospective Cohort Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples
• What Is an Observational Study? | Guide & Examples
• What Is Concurrent Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Content Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Convenience Sampling? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Convergent Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Criterion Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Data Cleansing? | Definition, Guide & Examples
• What Is Deductive Reasoning? | Explanation & Examples
• What Is Discriminant Validity? | Definition & Example
• What Is Ecological Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Ethnography? | Definition, Guide & Examples
• What Is Face Validity? | Guide, Definition & Examples
• What Is Non-Probability Sampling? | Types & Examples
• What Is Participant Observation? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Peer Review? | Types & Examples
• What Is Predictive Validity? | Examples & Definition
• What Is Probability Sampling? | Types & Examples
• What Is Purposive Sampling? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Qualitative Observation? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples
• What Is Quantitative Observation? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Quantitative Research? | Definition, Uses & Methods

"I thought AI Proofreading was useless but.."

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Historical Ownership of Family Firms and Corporate Fraud

• Original Paper
• Published: 17 September 2024

Cite this article

• Xin Huang 1 ,
• Wanrong Li 2 ,
• Chen Cheng   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0259-7536 3 ,
• Hao Huang 4 &
• Guanchun Liu 5  

We examine the impact of family firms’ historical ownership on corporate fraud. Our results show that restructured family firms from state-owned enterprises are more likely to violate and commit more fraud than entrepreneurial family firms. This finding is robust to the difference-in-difference-in-differences estimation, an instrument variables regression, fixed effects research design, and propensity score matching (PSM) approach analysis. Mechanism analysis shows that restructured family firms result in lower financial performance, high labor redundancy, inefficient investments, and cash volatility. Therefore, restructured family firms have a stronger incentive to conceal these problems through corporate fraud. Furthermore, the effects of family firms’ historical ownership on corporate fraud are weakened for a more extended period after SOE ownership reform and the restructuring approach adopted by equity takeover.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Anderson, R. C., & Reeb, D. M. (2003). Founding-family ownership and firm performance: Evidence from the S&P 500. Journal of Finance, 58 , 1301–1328.

Article   Google Scholar  

Biggerstaff, L., Cicero, D. C., & Puckett, A. (2015). Unethical culture and corporate misbehavior. Journal of Financial Economics, 117 (1), 98–121.

Chen, S., Chen, X., & Cheng, Q. (2008a). Do family firms provide more or less voluntary disclosure? Journal of Accounting Research, 46 (3), 499–536.

Chen, J. C., Patten, D. M., & Roberts, R. W. (2008b). Corporate charitable contributions: A corporate social performance or legitimacy strategy? Journal of Business Ethics, 82 (1), 131–144.

Chen, H., Chen, J. Z., Lobo, G. J., & Wang, Y. (2010). Association between borrower and lender state ownership and accounting conservatism. Journal of Accounting Research, 48 (5), 973–1014.

Chen, J., Fan, Y., & Zhang, X. (2022). Rookie independent directors and corporate fraud in China. Finance Research Letters, 46 , 102411.

Cheng, C., Li, S., & Han, J. (2022a). Origin matters: How does institution imprint affect family business TFP? International Review of Financial Analysis, 83 , 102272.

Cheng, C., Li, S., Liu, S., & Zhang, S. (2022b). Origin matters: The institution imprint effect and green innovation in family businesses. Finance Research Letters, 50 , 103324.

Cheng, C., Li, W., Liu, G., & Liu, Y. (2023). Origin matters: Institutional imprinting and family firm innovation in China. Emerging Markets Review, 55 , 100990.

Claessens, S., Djankov, S., Lang, L. H., et al. (2000). The separation of ownership and control in East Asian corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58 (12), 81–112.

Desai, M. A., Foley, C. F., & Hines, J. R. (2005). Foreign direct investment and the domestic capital stock. The American Economic Review, 95 (2), 33–38.

Dewenter, K. L., & Malatesta, P. H. (1997). Public offerings of state‐owned and privately‐owned enterprises: An international comparison. The Journal of Finance , 52 (4), 1659–1679.

Google Scholar  

Ding, S., & Wu, Z. (2014). Family ownership and corporate misconduct in US small firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 123 (2), 183–195.

Dinh, T. Q., Calabrò, A., Campopiano, G., & Basco, R. (2021). The impact of politically connected CEOs and boards of directors on firm performance: A study of Vietnamese family and nonfamily firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 46 (5), 1284–1316.

Du, X. (2015). Is corporate philanthropy used as environmental misconduct dressing? Evidence from Chinese family-owned firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 129 , 341–361.

Dyreng, S., Hanlon, M., & Maydew, E. (2008). Long-run corporate tax avoidance. The Accounting Review, 83 (1), 61–82.

Erdogan, I., Rondi, E., & De Massis, A. (2020). Managing the tradition and innovation paradox in family firms: A family imprinting perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 44 (1), 20–54.

Fralich, R., & Ahmadsimab, A. (2023). Forged at workforce entry? CEO imprinting, information uncertainty and merger wave timing. Journal of Management Studies .

Gan, J., Guo, Y., & Xu, C. (2018). Decentralized privatization and change of control rights in China. The Review of Financial Studies, 31 (10), 3854–3894.

Goergen, M., O’Sullivan, N., & Wood, G. (2014). The consequences of private equity acquisitions for employees: New evidence on the impact on wages, employment, and productivity. Human Resource Management Journal, 24 (2), 145–158.

Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P., & De Castro, J. (2011). The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. Academy of Management Annals, 5 (1), 653–707.

Han, Y., Zheng, E., & Xu, M. (2014). The influence from the past: Organizational imprinting and firms' compliance with social insurance policies in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 122 (1), –77.

Han, Y., & Zheng, E. (2016). Why firms perform differently in corporate social responsibility? Firm ownership and the persistence of organizational imprints. Management and Organization Review, 12 (3), 605–629.

Hass, L. H., Tarsalewska, M., & Zhan, F. (2016). Equity incentives and corporate fraud in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 138 , 723–742.

Heckman, J. J. (1976). The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection, and limited dependent variables, and a simple estimator for such models. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, 5 (4), 475–492.

Hope, O. K., Yue, H., & Zhong, Q. (2020). China’s anti-corruption campaign and financial reporting quality. Contemporary Accounting Research, 37 (2), 1015–1043.

Hu, Q., Li, W., Lin, C., & Wei, L. (2024). What causes privatization? Evidence from import competition in China. Management Science, 70 (5), 3080–3101.

Jaskiewicz, P., Combs, J. G., & Rau, S. B. (2015). Entrepreneurial legacy: Toward a theory of how some family firms nurture transgenerational entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 30 (1), 29–49.

Ji, J., Huang, Z., & Li, Q. (2021). Guilt and corporate philanthropy: The case of the privatization in China. Academy of Management Journal, 64 (6), 1969–1995.

Jiang, G., Lee, C. M., Yue, H., et al. (2010). Tunneling through intercorporate loans: The China experience. Journal of Financial Economics, 98 (1), 1–20.

Kong, D. M., & Qin, N. (2021). China’s anticorruption campaign and entrepreneurship. Journal of Law and Economics, 64 (1), 153–180.

Kotlar, J., & De Massis, A. (2013). Goal setting in family firms: Goal diversity, social interactions, and collective commitment to family-centered goals. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37 (6), 1263–1288.

Kriauciunas, A. & Kale, P. (2006). The impact of socialist imprinting and search on resource change: A study of firms in Lithuania. Strategic Management Journal, 27 (7), 659–679.

Krishnan, G., & Peytcheva, M. (2019). The risk of fraud in family firms: Assessments of external auditors. Journal of Business Ethics, 157 , 261–278.

La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54 , 471–517.

Lee, C. W. J. (2001). Financial restructuring of state-owned enterprises in China: The case of Shanghai Sunve Pharmaceutical Corporation. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26 (7–8), 67–689.

Lee, J., Lee, K. J., & Nagarajan, N. J. (2014). Birds of a feather: Value implications of political alignment between top management and directors. Journal of Financial Economics, 112 (2), 232–250.

Leung, A., Der Foo, M., & Chaturvedi, S. (2013). Imprinting effects of founding core teams on HR values in new ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37 (1), 87–106.

Li, J., Li, P., & Wang, B. (2019). The liability of opaqueness: State ownership and the likelihood of deal completion in international acquisitions by Chinese firms. Strategic Management Journal, 40 (2), 303–327.

Lin, L. H. (2011). Cultural and organizational antecedents of guanxi: The Chinese cases. Journal of Business Ethics , 99 (3), 441–451.

Lin, J. Y., Cai, F., & Li, Z. (1998). Competition, policy burdens, and state-owned enterprise reform. American Economic Review, 88 (2), 422–427.

Liu, J., Wang, Z., & Zhu, W. (2021). Does privatization reform alleviate ownership discrimination? Evidence from the Split-share structure reform in China. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66 , 101848.

Lu, F., Zhu, Z., Zhu, L., & Gao, H. (2022). Political tie hot potato: The contingent effect of China’s anti-corruption policy on cash and innovation. Research Policy, 51 (4), 104476.

Marquis, C., & Qiao, K. (2023). History matters for organizations: An integrative framework for understanding influences from the past. Academy of Management Review, In-Press.

Marquis, C., & Tilcsik, A. (2013). Imprinting: Toward a multilevel theory. Academy of Management Annals, 7 (1), 195–245.

Masulis, R. W., Pham, P. K., & Zein, J. (2011). Family business groups around the world: Financing advantages, control motivations, and organizational choices. The Review of Financial Studies, 24 (11), 3556–3600.

Mathias, B. D., Williams, D. W., & Smith, A. R. (2015). Entrepreneurial inception: The role of imprinting in entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing, 30 (1), 11–28.

Megginson, W. L., & Netter, J. M. (2001). From state to market: A survey of empirical studies on privatization. Journal of Economic Literature, 39 (2), 321–389.

Perkmann, M., & Spicer, A. (2014). How emerging organizations take form: The role of imprinting and values in organizational bricolage. Organization Science, 25 (6), 1785–1806.

Pieper, T. M., Smith, A. D., Kudlats, J., & Astrachan, J. H. (2015). The persistence of multifamily firms: Founder imprinting, simple rules, and monitoring processes. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39 (6), 1313–1337.

Poutziouris, P., Wang, Y., & Chan, S. (2002). Chinese entrepreneurship: The development of small family firms in China. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 9 (4), 383–399.

Prencipe, A., Markarian, G., & Pozza, L. (2008). Earnings management in family firms: Evidence from R&D cost capitalization in Italy. Family Business Review, 21 (1), 71–88.

Ren, L. Y., Xi, Z., & Wan, L. Y. (2022). Missing analyst forecasts and corporate fraud: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 181 (1), 171–194.

Ru, H., Yang, E., & Zou, K. (2021). Combating the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of the SARS imprint. Management Science, 67 (9), 5606–5615.

Shi, W., Connelly, B. L., & Hoskisson, R. E. (2017). External corporate governance and financial fraud: Cognitive evaluation theory insights on agency theory prescriptions. Strategic Management Journal, 38 , 1268–1286.

Shinkle, G. A., & Kriauciunas, A. P. (2012). The impact of current and founding institutions on the strength of competitive aspirations in transition economies. Strategic Management Journal, 133 (4), 448–458.

Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1994). Politicians and firms. The quarterly journal of economics, 109 (4), 995–1025.

Sison, A. J. G., Ferrero, I., & Redín, D. M. (2020). Some virtue ethics implications from Aristotelian and Confucian perspectives on family and business. Journal of Business Ethics, 165 (2), 241–254.

Simsek, Z., Fox, B. C., & Heavey, C. (2015). What’s past is prologue, a framework, review, and future directions for organizational research on imprinting. Journal of Management, 141 (1), 288–317.

Stuart, T., & Wang, Y. (2016). Who cooks the books in China, and does it pay? Evidence from private, high-technology firms. Strategic Management Journal, 37 (13), 2658–2676.

Sun, P., Hu, H. W., & Hillman, A. J. (2016). The dark side of board political capital: Enabling blockholder rent appropriation. Academy of Management Journal, 59 (5), 1801–1822.

Sun, Q., & Tong, W. H. (2003). China share issue privatization: the extent of its success. Journal of financial economics, 70 (2), 183–222.

Tilcsik, A. (2014). Imprint-environment fit and performance: How organizational munificence at the time of hire affects subsequent job performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 59 (4), 639–668.

Tu, G., & Yu, F. (2015). Tunneling or not? The change of legal environment on the effect of post-privatization performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 129 (2), 491–510.

Ullah, S., & Jamali, D. (2010). Institutional investors and corporate social responsibility: The role of Islamic financial institutions. International Review of Business Research Papers, 6 (1), 619–630.

Wang, D., Du, F., & Marquis, C. (2019). Defending Mao’s dream: How politicians’ ideological imprinting affects firms’ political appointment in China. Academy of Management Journal, 62 (4), 1111–1136.

Wei, Z., Xie, F., & Zhang, S. (2005). Ownership structure and firm value in China’s privatized firms: 1991–2001. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 40 (1), 87–108.

Wei, T., Pan, H., Wei, B., & Shi, C. (2024). “Exhale the old and inhale the new”: Comparing the impact of anti-corruption campaign on entrepreneurship and exiting markets in China. Small Business Economics , 1–20.

Wesley, C. L., Martin, G. W., Rice, D. B., & Lubojacky, C. J. (2022). Do the right thing: The imprinting of deonance at the upper echelons. Journal of Business Ethics, 180 (1), 187–213.

Wheat, J., Swartz, B., & Apperson, J. (2003). The mismatch of expectations and tools in transition economies. Journal of Business Ethics, 47 , 335–341.

Xu, K., Tihanyi, L., & Hitt, M. A. (2017). Firm resources, governmental power, and privatization. Journal of Management, 43 (4), 998–1024.

Yiu, D. W., Wan, W. P., & Xu, Y. (2019). Alternative governance and corporate financial fraud in transition economies: Evidence from China. Journal of Management, 45 (7), 2685–2720

Yong, K. G., Gupta, P., Im, J., & Shin, H. (2021). Evasive shareholder meetings and corporate fraud. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66 (2), 101807.

Zellweger, T. M., Kellermanns, F. W., Chrisman, J. J., et al. (2012). Family control and family firm valuation by family CEOs: The importance of intentions for transgenerational Control. Organization Science, 23 (3), 851–868.

Zhang, J. (2018). Public governance and corporate fraud: Evidence from the recent anti-corruption campaign in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 148 (2), 375–396.

Zhang, N., Bo, L., Wang, S., & Wang, X. (2024). Exploring confucian culture’s impact on corporate debt default risk: An ethical decision-making approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 1–18.

Zhang, C., Tan, J., & Tan, D. (2016). Fit by adaptation or fit by founding? A comparative study of existing and new entrepreneurial cohorts in China. Strategic Management Journal, 37 (5), 911–931.

Zhou, K. Z., Gao, G. Y., & Zhao, H. (2017). State ownership and firm innovation in China: An integrated view of institutional and efficiency logics. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62 (2), 375–404.

Download references

Acknowledge financial support from National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 72373169). Acknowledge financial support from Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (No. 2021A1515110992 and No. 2022A1515010204). Acknowledge financial support from China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (No. 2023M741072 and No. 2024T170248). Acknowledge financial support from Social Science Evaluation Committee Foundation of Hunan Province (No. XSP2023GLC112). Acknowledge financial support from Scientific Research Foundation of Hunan Provincial Department of Education (No. 23B0589). Acknowledge Henan Province Science and Technology Innovation Talent Program(No. 2023-CXRC-01). 

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

International Business School, Hunan University of Technology and Business, Changsha, 410205, China

Business School, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China

Business School, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China

International Business School Suzhou, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Suzhou, 215123, China

Lingnan College, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, 510275, China

Guanchun Liu

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chen Cheng .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The author declares that we have no conflicts of interest to this work.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

This table presents definitions of the key variables used in our regressions, including dependent variables, independent variable and control variables (Table  14 ).

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

Huang, X., Li, W., Cheng, C. et al. Historical Ownership of Family Firms and Corporate Fraud. J Bus Ethics (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05817-6

Download citation

Received : 07 February 2024

Accepted : 04 September 2024

Published : 17 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05817-6

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

• Historical ownership
• Restructured family firm
• Entrepreneurial family firm
• Corporate fraud
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Ways to Give
• Contact an Expert
• Explore WRI Perspectives

Filter Your Site Experience by Topic

Applying the filters below will filter all articles, data, insights and projects by the topic area you select.

• All Topics Remove filter
• Climate filter site by Climate
• Cities filter site by Cities
• Energy filter site by Energy
• Food filter site by Food
• Forests filter site by Forests
• Freshwater filter site by Freshwater
• Ocean filter site by Ocean
• Business filter site by Business
• Economics filter site by Economics
• Finance filter site by Finance
• Equity & Governance filter site by Equity & Governance

Search WRI.org

Not sure where to find something? Search all of the site's content.

Technical Note: Climate Finance Calculator - Data and Methodology

This technical note discusses WRI's Climate Finance Calculator , which is designed to calculate countries’ contributions to international climate finance based on their capacity to pay (economic metrics) and climate responsibility (emissions metrics). It extends WRI’s previous work by providing users with more flexibility to explore the implications of different combinations of countries’ emissions and economic metrics on their climate finance contributions.

This Technical Note is part of International Climate Finance within Finance . Reach out to Hayden Higgins for more information.

• Hayden Higgins

Climate finance is a vital element of the negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). In 2009, through the Copenhagen Accord, developed countries pledged to mobilize US$100 billion annually in climate finance for developing nations by 2020, a goal that was later extended through 2025. In 2023, at COP28 in Dubai, countries established a loss and damage fund to support developing countries. At COP29, countries are supposed to agree on a new finance goal that will replace the US$100 billion commitment to support developing countries’ climate action needs and priorities.

The global finance gap for climate transition is widening. According to data from the Climate Policy Initiative, the annual climate finance needed through 2030 increases steadily from $8.1 to $9 trillion before surging to over $10 trillion annually from 2031 to 2050. This marks at least a sixfold increase from the US$1.3 trillion annual climate finance flows between 2021 and 2022. Emerging markets and developing countries (excluding China) may need around $2.4 trillion annually by 2030 in external finance for mitigation and adaptation to meet climate and nature goals. Developing country nationally determined contributions list nearly $6 trillion in needs between 2020 and 2030. Securing sustained climate finance is crucial to increasing and maintaining climate action implementation.

The Climate Finance Calculator provides scenarios that allow users to compare countries’ climate finance shares based on their emissions levels and economic status. The climate finance shares are the indicative minimum threshold of what a country could contribute toward the selected finance target, depending on its responsibility and capability to pay, measured by its historical emissions and income, respectively. The calculator aims to inform UNFCCC climate finance negotiations around, for example, the new collective quantified goal (NCQG) and the capitalization and replenishment of the loss and damage fund and the Green Climate Fund (GCF).

This technical note describes the data sources and methods used to calculate the climate finance shares for each country based on selected indicators and addresses the limitations of the Climate Finance Calculator.

Preview image by Amira Grotendiek / UNclimatechange / Flickr

Connected to this report

Climate finance calculator, which countries should pay for international climate finance, green climate fund contributions calculator 2.0, what could the new climate finance goal look like 7 elements under negotiation, untangling the finance goal: an introduction to the new collective quantified goal.

International Climate Finance

Our International Climate Finance work strengthens key policies and governance elements in important international institutions to promote Paris Agreement alignment in finance and uphold the role of climate finance in international negotiations.

Primary Contacts

Communications Manager, Sustainable Finance Center

How You Can Help

WRI relies on the generosity of donors like you to turn research into action. You can support our work by making a gift today or exploring other ways to give.

Stay Informed

World Resources Institute 10 G Street NE Suite 800 Washington DC 20002 +1 (202) 729-7600

© 2024 World Resources Institute

Envision a world where everyone can enjoy clean air, walkable cities, vibrant landscapes, nutritious food and affordable energy.