What are the main characteristics of a good hypothesis?

First of all, let's contrast an experimental hypothesis with a question:

What are the main characteristics of a good hypothesis

This is why, for example, we can be more confident of research results that are consistent with a causal-directional hypothesis, than is the case of findings that are consistent with a non-directional hypothesis.

A directional and causal hypothesis is the most specific of those discussed so far.

The main characteristics of a good hypothesis

Is that a hypothesis? Yes. Why? It'sopinion. And because the reader could question the validity of the statement. Thatdoes not mean it's wrong. It just means that the reader could argue effectively thatthe statement is wrong, or the reader could agree with it. The writer would need toprovide support to strengthen the opinion.

(Note that all of the example questions/hypotheses thus far have been relational).

To complete the Project Successfully, it is necessary to write or plan a Good Hypothesis. Hypothesis is nothing but the basic Assumption to do research Project. The different characteristics of Good Hypothesis are given as below –

is the proportion in the first sample with the characteristic of interest,

What are 3 characteristics of a hypothesis

1.0 atmospheres of pressure, or standard air pressure, provided he lowest electrical voltage yield from both types of fuel cell. While 1.5 atmospheres of pressure increased the voltage yield, it did so only marginally. The decrease in atmospheric pressure to .5 atmospheres provided the greatest electrical yield. Hypothesis 3 stated that the created fuel cell would provide less voltage than the manufactured cell. This was also disproved. At no point during testing did the voltage output of the manufactured cell exceed that of the created cell.

What is a characteristic of a hypothesis

The (or hypotheses -- there may be more than one) is our working hypothesis -- our prediction, or what we expect to happen. It is also called the - because it is an alternative to the null hypothesis. Technically, the claim of the research hypothesis is that with respect to the outcome variable, our samples are from different populations (remember that refers to the group from which the sample is drawn). If we predict that math tutoring results in better performance, than we are predicting that after the treatment (tutoring), the treated sample truly is different from the untreated one (and therefore, from a different population).


It is contended that obsessional phenomena are archaic, involuntary, repetitive thought processes that stimulate strong aversive emotional states (e.g. fear, disgust) and lead to risk avoidance behaviour. It is hypothesised that the neurobiological system that generates these phenomena has the function of generating risk scenarios without conscious intervention and may thus function as an ‘Involuntary Risk Scenario Generating System’ (IRSGS). Compulsive rituals, the other component of OCD, are conceptualised as primitive harm avoidance behavioural routines that are under semi-voluntary control (Bradshaw, 1997). It is suggested that the IRSGS operates primarily as a self-generated conditioning system whereby the individual can develop harm avoidance behavioural strategies without experiencing the risks involved in real-life dangers.

What are the characteristics of a good hypothesis

On the other hand, the null hypothesis is straightforward -- what is the probability that our treated and untreated samples are from the same population (that the treatment or predictor has no effect)? There is only one set of statistical probabilities -- calculation of chance effects. Instead of directly testing H, we test H. If we can reject H, (and factors are under control), we can accept H. To put it another way, the fate of the research hypothesis depends upon what happens to H.