hypothesis is only used for experimental research

• 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."

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

How Editage All Access is Boosting Productivity for Academics in India

How to Write a Dissertation: A Beginner’s Guide 

• 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)

Research and Hypothesis Testing: Moving from Theory to Experiment

• First Online: 14 November 2019

Cite this chapter

• Mark W. Scerbo 6 ,
• Aaron W. Calhoun 7 &
• Joshua Hui 8  

2620 Accesses

In this chapter, we discuss the theoretical foundation for research and why theory is important for conducting experiments. We begin with a brief discussion of theory and its role in research. Next, we address the relationship between theory and hypotheses and distinguish between research questions and hypotheses. We then discuss theoretical constructs and how operational definitions make the constructs measurable. Next, we address the experiment and its role in establishing a plan to test the hypothesis. Finally, we offer an example from the literature of an experiment grounded in theory, the hypothesis that was tested, and the conclusions the authors were able to draw based on the hypothesis. We conclude by emphasizing that theory development and refinement does not result from a single experiment, but instead requires a process of research that takes time and commitment.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Research Questions and Research Design

An Introduction to Experimental Design Research

Looking Back

Badia P, Runyon RP. Fundamentals of behavioral research. Reading: Addison-Wesley; 1982.

Google Scholar  

Roeckelein JE. Elsevier’s dictionary of psychological theories. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science; 2006.

Maxwell SE, Delaney HD. Designing experiments and analyzing data: a model comparison perspective. 2nd ed. Mahwah: Erlbaum; 2004.

Graziano AM, Raulin ML. Research methods: a process of inquiry. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 2000.

Passer MW. Research methods: concepts and connections. New York: Worth; 2014.

Weinger MB, Herndon OW, Paulus MP, Gaba D, Zornow MH, Dallen LD. An objective methodology for task analysis and workload assessment in anesthesia providers. Anesthesiology. 1994;80:77–92.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Warm JS. An introduction to vigilance. In: Warm JS, editor. Sustained attention in human performance. Chichester: Wiley; 1984. p. 1–14.

Freud S. The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud. Volume XIX (1923–1926) The ego and the id and other works. Strachey, James, Freud, Anna, 1895–1982, Rothgeb, Carrie Lee, 1925-, Richards, Angela, Scientific literature corporation. London: Hogarth Press; 1978.

Mill JS. A system of logic, vol. 1. Honolulu: University Press of the Pacific; 2002. p. 1843.

Ericsson KA, Krampe RT, Tesch-Romer C. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol Rev. 1993;100:363–406.

Article   Google Scholar  

Darian S. Understanding the language of science. Austin: University of Texas Press; 2003.

Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 1984.

Calhoun AW, Gaba DM. Live or let die: new developments in the ongoing debate over mannequin death. Simul Healthc. 2017;12:279–81.

Goldberg A, et al. Exposure to simulated mortality affects resident performance during assessment scenarios. Simul Healthc. 2017;12:282–8.

Robinson KA, Saldanha IJ, Mckoy NA. Frameworks for determining research gaps during systematic reviews. Report No.: 11-EHC043-EF. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2011.

O’Sullivan D, Wilk S, Michalowski W, Farion K. Using PICO to align medical evidence with MDs decision making models. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013;192:1057.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Christensen LB, Johnson RB, Turner LA. Research methods: design and analysis. 12th ed. Boston: Pearson; 2014.

Keppel G. Design and analysis: a researcher’s handbook. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1982.

Spielberger CD, Sydeman SJ. State-trait anxiety inventory and state-trait anger expression inventory. In: Maruish ME, editor. The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcome assessment. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1994. p. 292–321.

Cheng A, et al. Reporting guidelines for health care simulation research: extensions to the CONSORT and STROBE statements. Simul Healthc. 2016;11(4):238–48.

Turner TR, Scerbo MW, Gliva-McConvey G, Wallace AM. Standardized patient encounters: periodic versus postencounter evaluation of nontechnical clinical performance. Simul Healthc. 2016;11:174–2.

Baddeley AD, Hitch GJ. Working memory. In: Bower GH, editor. The psychology of learning and motivation: advances in research and theory. 8th ed. New York: Academic; 1974. p. 47–89.

Kuhn TS. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1962.

Newton-Smith WH. The rationality of science. London: Routledge & Keegan Paul; 1981.

Book   Google Scholar  

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

Mark W. Scerbo

Department of Pediatrics, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA

Aaron W. Calhoun

Emergency Medicine, Kaiser Permanente, Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark W. Scerbo .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Monash Institute for Health and Clinical Education, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia

Debra Nestel

Department of Surgery, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, USA

Kevin Kunkler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Scerbo, M.W., Calhoun, A.W., Hui, J. (2019). Research and Hypothesis Testing: Moving from Theory to Experiment. In: Nestel, D., Hui, J., Kunkler, K., Scerbo, M., Calhoun, A. (eds) Healthcare Simulation Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26837-4_22

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26837-4_22

Published : 14 November 2019

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-26836-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-26837-4

eBook Packages : Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedical and Life Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

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

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

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

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

Research Hypothesis 101

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

What is a hypothesis?

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

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

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

Hypothesis: sleep impacts academic performance.

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

But that’s not good enough…

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

What is a research hypothesis?

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

Let’s take a look at these more closely.

Need a helping hand?

Hypothesis Essential #1: Specificity & Clarity

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

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

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

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

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

Hypothesis Essential #2: Testability (Provability)

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

For example, consider the hypothesis we mentioned earlier:

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

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

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

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

Defining A Research Hypothesis

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

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

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

What about the null hypothesis?

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

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

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

And there you have it – hypotheses in a nutshell. 

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

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.

• Print Friendly

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

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

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

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

There are 5 main steps in hypothesis testing:

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

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

Table of contents

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

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

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

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

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Methodology

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

Research bias

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

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

Bevans, R. (2023, June 22). Hypothesis Testing | A Step-by-Step Guide with Easy Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 9, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/hypothesis-testing/

Is this article helpful?

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

• 4 minute read
• 370.8K 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.

• Experimental Research Designs: Types, Examples & Methods

Experimental research is the most familiar type of research design for individuals in the physical sciences and a host of other fields. This is mainly because experimental research is a classical scientific experiment, similar to those performed in high school science classes.

Imagine taking 2 samples of the same plant and exposing one of them to sunlight, while the other is kept away from sunlight. Let the plant exposed to sunlight be called sample A, while the latter is called sample B.

If after the duration of the research, we find out that sample A grows and sample B dies, even though they are both regularly wetted and given the same treatment. Therefore, we can conclude that sunlight will aid growth in all similar plants.

What is Experimental Research?

Experimental research is a scientific approach to research, where one or more independent variables are manipulated and applied to one or more dependent variables to measure their effect on the latter. The effect of the independent variables on the dependent variables is usually observed and recorded over some time, to aid researchers in drawing a reasonable conclusion regarding the relationship between these 2 variable types.

The experimental research method is widely used in physical and social sciences, psychology, and education. It is based on the comparison between two or more groups with a straightforward logic, which may, however, be difficult to execute.

Mostly related to a laboratory test procedure, experimental research designs involve collecting quantitative data and performing statistical analysis on them during research. Therefore, making it an example of quantitative research method .

What are The Types of Experimental Research Design?

The types of experimental research design are determined by the way the researcher assigns subjects to different conditions and groups. They are of 3 types, namely; pre-experimental, quasi-experimental, and true experimental research.

Pre-experimental Research Design

In pre-experimental research design, either a group or various dependent groups are observed for the effect of the application of an independent variable which is presumed to cause change. It is the simplest form of experimental research design and is treated with no control group.

Although very practical, experimental research is lacking in several areas of the true-experimental criteria. The pre-experimental research design is further divided into three types

• One-shot Case Study Research Design

In this type of experimental study, only one dependent group or variable is considered. The study is carried out after some treatment which was presumed to cause change, making it a posttest study.

• One-group Pretest-posttest Research Design: 

This research design combines both posttest and pretest study by carrying out a test on a single group before the treatment is administered and after the treatment is administered. With the former being administered at the beginning of treatment and later at the end.

• Static-group Comparison: 

In a static-group comparison study, 2 or more groups are placed under observation, where only one of the groups is subjected to some treatment while the other groups are held static. All the groups are post-tested, and the observed differences between the groups are assumed to be a result of the treatment.

Quasi-experimental Research Design

  The word “quasi” means partial, half, or pseudo. Therefore, the quasi-experimental research bearing a resemblance to the true experimental research, but not the same.  In quasi-experiments, the participants are not randomly assigned, and as such, they are used in settings where randomization is difficult or impossible.

 This is very common in educational research, where administrators are unwilling to allow the random selection of students for experimental samples.

Some examples of quasi-experimental research design include; the time series, no equivalent control group design, and the counterbalanced design.

True Experimental Research Design

The true experimental research design relies on statistical analysis to approve or disprove a hypothesis. It is the most accurate type of experimental design and may be carried out with or without a pretest on at least 2 randomly assigned dependent subjects.

The true experimental research design must contain a control group, a variable that can be manipulated by the researcher, and the distribution must be random. The classification of true experimental design include:

• The posttest-only Control Group Design: In this design, subjects are randomly selected and assigned to the 2 groups (control and experimental), and only the experimental group is treated. After close observation, both groups are post-tested, and a conclusion is drawn from the difference between these groups.
• The pretest-posttest Control Group Design: For this control group design, subjects are randomly assigned to the 2 groups, both are presented, but only the experimental group is treated. After close observation, both groups are post-tested to measure the degree of change in each group.
• Solomon four-group Design: This is the combination of the pretest-only and the pretest-posttest control groups. In this case, the randomly selected subjects are placed into 4 groups.

The first two of these groups are tested using the posttest-only method, while the other two are tested using the pretest-posttest method.

Examples of Experimental Research

Experimental research examples are different, depending on the type of experimental research design that is being considered. The most basic example of experimental research is laboratory experiments, which may differ in nature depending on the subject of research.

Administering Exams After The End of Semester

During the semester, students in a class are lectured on particular courses and an exam is administered at the end of the semester. In this case, the students are the subjects or dependent variables while the lectures are the independent variables treated on the subjects.

Only one group of carefully selected subjects are considered in this research, making it a pre-experimental research design example. We will also notice that tests are only carried out at the end of the semester, and not at the beginning.

Further making it easy for us to conclude that it is a one-shot case study research. 

Employee Skill Evaluation

Before employing a job seeker, organizations conduct tests that are used to screen out less qualified candidates from the pool of qualified applicants. This way, organizations can determine an employee’s skill set at the point of employment.

In the course of employment, organizations also carry out employee training to improve employee productivity and generally grow the organization. Further evaluation is carried out at the end of each training to test the impact of the training on employee skills, and test for improvement.

Here, the subject is the employee, while the treatment is the training conducted. This is a pretest-posttest control group experimental research example.

Evaluation of Teaching Method

Let us consider an academic institution that wants to evaluate the teaching method of 2 teachers to determine which is best. Imagine a case whereby the students assigned to each teacher is carefully selected probably due to personal request by parents or due to stubbornness and smartness.

This is a no equivalent group design example because the samples are not equal. By evaluating the effectiveness of each teacher’s teaching method this way, we may conclude after a post-test has been carried out.

However, this may be influenced by factors like the natural sweetness of a student. For example, a very smart student will grab more easily than his or her peers irrespective of the method of teaching.

What are the Characteristics of Experimental Research?  

Experimental research contains dependent, independent and extraneous variables. The dependent variables are the variables being treated or manipulated and are sometimes called the subject of the research.

The independent variables are the experimental treatment being exerted on the dependent variables. Extraneous variables, on the other hand, are other factors affecting the experiment that may also contribute to the change.

The setting is where the experiment is carried out. Many experiments are carried out in the laboratory, where control can be exerted on the extraneous variables, thereby eliminating them.

Other experiments are carried out in a less controllable setting. The choice of setting used in research depends on the nature of the experiment being carried out.

• Multivariable

Experimental research may include multiple independent variables, e.g. time, skills, test scores, etc.

Why Use Experimental Research Design?  

Experimental research design can be majorly used in physical sciences, social sciences, education, and psychology. It is used to make predictions and draw conclusions on a subject matter. 

Some uses of experimental research design are highlighted below.

• Medicine: Experimental research is used to provide the proper treatment for diseases. In most cases, rather than directly using patients as the research subject, researchers take a sample of the bacteria from the patient’s body and are treated with the developed antibacterial

The changes observed during this period are recorded and evaluated to determine its effectiveness. This process can be carried out using different experimental research methods.

• Education: Asides from science subjects like Chemistry and Physics which involves teaching students how to perform experimental research, it can also be used in improving the standard of an academic institution. This includes testing students’ knowledge on different topics, coming up with better teaching methods, and the implementation of other programs that will aid student learning.
• Human Behavior: Social scientists are the ones who mostly use experimental research to test human behaviour. For example, consider 2 people randomly chosen to be the subject of the social interaction research where one person is placed in a room without human interaction for 1 year.

The other person is placed in a room with a few other people, enjoying human interaction. There will be a difference in their behaviour at the end of the experiment.

• UI/UX: During the product development phase, one of the major aims of the product team is to create a great user experience with the product. Therefore, before launching the final product design, potential are brought in to interact with the product.

For example, when finding it difficult to choose how to position a button or feature on the app interface, a random sample of product testers are allowed to test the 2 samples and how the button positioning influences the user interaction is recorded.

What are the Disadvantages of Experimental Research?  

• It is highly prone to human error due to its dependency on variable control which may not be properly implemented. These errors could eliminate the validity of the experiment and the research being conducted.
• Exerting control of extraneous variables may create unrealistic situations. Eliminating real-life variables will result in inaccurate conclusions. This may also result in researchers controlling the variables to suit his or her personal preferences.
• It is a time-consuming process. So much time is spent on testing dependent variables and waiting for the effect of the manipulation of dependent variables to manifest.
• It is expensive.
• It is very risky and may have ethical complications that cannot be ignored. This is common in medical research, where failed trials may lead to a patient’s death or a deteriorating health condition.
• Experimental research results are not descriptive.
• Response bias can also be supplied by the subject of the conversation.
• Human responses in experimental research can be difficult to measure.

What are the Data Collection Methods in Experimental Research?  

Data collection methods in experimental research are the different ways in which data can be collected for experimental research. They are used in different cases, depending on the type of research being carried out.

1. Observational Study

This type of study is carried out over a long period. It measures and observes the variables of interest without changing existing conditions.

When researching the effect of social interaction on human behavior, the subjects who are placed in 2 different environments are observed throughout the research. No matter the kind of absurd behavior that is exhibited by the subject during this period, its condition will not be changed.

This may be a very risky thing to do in medical cases because it may lead to death or worse medical conditions.

2. Simulations

This procedure uses mathematical, physical, or computer models to replicate a real-life process or situation. It is frequently used when the actual situation is too expensive, dangerous, or impractical to replicate in real life.

This method is commonly used in engineering and operational research for learning purposes and sometimes as a tool to estimate possible outcomes of real research. Some common situation software are Simulink, MATLAB, and Simul8.

Not all kinds of experimental research can be carried out using simulation as a data collection tool . It is very impractical for a lot of laboratory-based research that involves chemical processes.

A survey is a tool used to gather relevant data about the characteristics of a population and is one of the most common data collection tools. A survey consists of a group of questions prepared by the researcher, to be answered by the research subject.

Surveys can be shared with the respondents both physically and electronically. When collecting data through surveys, the kind of data collected depends on the respondent, and researchers have limited control over it.

Formplus is the best tool for collecting experimental data using survey s. It has relevant features that will aid the data collection process and can also be used in other aspects of experimental research.

Differences between Experimental and Non-Experimental Research 

1. In experimental research, the researcher can control and manipulate the environment of the research, including the predictor variable which can be changed. On the other hand, non-experimental research cannot be controlled or manipulated by the researcher at will.

This is because it takes place in a real-life setting, where extraneous variables cannot be eliminated. Therefore, it is more difficult to conclude non-experimental studies, even though they are much more flexible and allow for a greater range of study fields.

2. The relationship between cause and effect cannot be established in non-experimental research, while it can be established in experimental research. This may be because many extraneous variables also influence the changes in the research subject, making it difficult to point at a particular variable as the cause of a particular change

3. Independent variables are not introduced, withdrawn, or manipulated in non-experimental designs, but the same may not be said about experimental research.

Experimental Research vs. Alternatives and When to Use Them

1. experimental research vs causal comparative.

Experimental research enables you to control variables and identify how the independent variable affects the dependent variable. Causal-comparative find out the cause-and-effect relationship between the variables by comparing already existing groups that are affected differently by the independent variable.

For example, in an experiment to see how K-12 education affects children and teenager development. An experimental research would split the children into groups, some would get formal K-12 education, while others won’t. This is not ethically right because every child has the right to education. So, what we do instead would be to compare already existing groups of children who are getting formal education with those who due to some circumstances can not.

Pros and Cons of Experimental vs Causal-Comparative Research

• Causal-Comparative:   Strengths:  More realistic than experiments, can be conducted in real-world settings.  Weaknesses:  Establishing causality can be weaker due to the lack of manipulation.

2. Experimental Research vs Correlational Research

When experimenting, you are trying to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between different variables. For example, you are trying to establish the effect of heat on water, the temperature keeps changing (independent variable) and you see how it affects the water (dependent variable).

For correlational research, you are not necessarily interested in the why or the cause-and-effect relationship between the variables, you are focusing on the relationship. Using the same water and temperature example, you are only interested in the fact that they change, you are not investigating which of the variables or other variables causes them to change.

Pros and Cons of Experimental vs Correlational Research

3. experimental research vs descriptive research.

With experimental research, you alter the independent variable to see how it affects the dependent variable, but with descriptive research you are simply studying the characteristics of the variable you are studying.

So, in an experiment to see how blown glass reacts to temperature, experimental research would keep altering the temperature to varying levels of high and low to see how it affects the dependent variable (glass). But descriptive research would investigate the glass properties.

Pros and Cons of Experimental vs Descriptive Research

4. experimental research vs action research.

Experimental research tests for causal relationships by focusing on one independent variable vs the dependent variable and keeps other variables constant. So, you are testing hypotheses and using the information from the research to contribute to knowledge.

However, with action research, you are using a real-world setting which means you are not controlling variables. You are also performing the research to solve actual problems and improve already established practices.

For example, if you are testing for how long commutes affect workers’ productivity. With experimental research, you would vary the length of commute to see how the time affects work. But with action research, you would account for other factors such as weather, commute route, nutrition, etc. Also, experimental research helps know the relationship between commute time and productivity, while action research helps you look for ways to improve productivity

Pros and Cons of Experimental vs Action Research

Conclusion  .

Experimental research designs are often considered to be the standard in research designs. This is partly due to the common misconception that research is equivalent to scientific experiments—a component of experimental research design.

In this research design, one or more subjects or dependent variables are randomly assigned to different treatments (i.e. independent variables manipulated by the researcher) and the results are observed to conclude. One of the uniqueness of experimental research is in its ability to control the effect of extraneous variables.

Experimental research is suitable for research whose goal is to examine cause-effect relationships, e.g. explanatory research. It can be conducted in the laboratory or field settings, depending on the aim of the research that is being carried out. 

Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free!

• examples of experimental research
• experimental research methods
• types of experimental research
• busayo.longe

You may also like:

What is Experimenter Bias? Definition, Types & Mitigation

In this article, we will look into the concept of experimental bias and how it can be identified in your research

Response vs Explanatory Variables: Definition & Examples

In this article, we’ll be comparing the two types of variables, what they both mean and see some of their real-life applications in research

Simpson’s Paradox & How to Avoid it in Experimental Research

In this article, we are going to look at Simpson’s Paradox from its historical point and later, we’ll consider its effect in...

Experimental Vs Non-Experimental Research: 15 Key Differences

Differences between experimental and non experimental research on definitions, types, examples, data collection tools, uses, advantages etc.

Formplus - For Seamless Data Collection

Collect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today..

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

10 Experimental research

Experimental research—often considered to be the ‘gold standard’ in research designs—is one of the most rigorous of all research designs. In this design, one or more independent variables are manipulated by the researcher (as treatments), subjects are randomly assigned to different treatment levels (random assignment), and the results of the treatments on outcomes (dependent variables) are observed. The unique strength of experimental research is its internal validity (causality) due to its ability to link cause and effect through treatment manipulation, while controlling for the spurious effect of extraneous variable.

Experimental research is best suited for explanatory research—rather than for descriptive or exploratory research—where the goal of the study is to examine cause-effect relationships. It also works well for research that involves a relatively limited and well-defined set of independent variables that can either be manipulated or controlled. Experimental research can be conducted in laboratory or field settings. Laboratory experiments , conducted in laboratory (artificial) settings, tend to be high in internal validity, but this comes at the cost of low external validity (generalisability), because the artificial (laboratory) setting in which the study is conducted may not reflect the real world. Field experiments are conducted in field settings such as in a real organisation, and are high in both internal and external validity. But such experiments are relatively rare, because of the difficulties associated with manipulating treatments and controlling for extraneous effects in a field setting.

Experimental research can be grouped into two broad categories: true experimental designs and quasi-experimental designs. Both designs require treatment manipulation, but while true experiments also require random assignment, quasi-experiments do not. Sometimes, we also refer to non-experimental research, which is not really a research design, but an all-inclusive term that includes all types of research that do not employ treatment manipulation or random assignment, such as survey research, observational research, and correlational studies.

Basic concepts

Treatment and control groups. In experimental research, some subjects are administered one or more experimental stimulus called a treatment (the treatment group ) while other subjects are not given such a stimulus (the control group ). The treatment may be considered successful if subjects in the treatment group rate more favourably on outcome variables than control group subjects. Multiple levels of experimental stimulus may be administered, in which case, there may be more than one treatment group. For example, in order to test the effects of a new drug intended to treat a certain medical condition like dementia, if a sample of dementia patients is randomly divided into three groups, with the first group receiving a high dosage of the drug, the second group receiving a low dosage, and the third group receiving a placebo such as a sugar pill (control group), then the first two groups are experimental groups and the third group is a control group. After administering the drug for a period of time, if the condition of the experimental group subjects improved significantly more than the control group subjects, we can say that the drug is effective. We can also compare the conditions of the high and low dosage experimental groups to determine if the high dose is more effective than the low dose.

Treatment manipulation. Treatments are the unique feature of experimental research that sets this design apart from all other research methods. Treatment manipulation helps control for the ‘cause’ in cause-effect relationships. Naturally, the validity of experimental research depends on how well the treatment was manipulated. Treatment manipulation must be checked using pretests and pilot tests prior to the experimental study. Any measurements conducted before the treatment is administered are called pretest measures , while those conducted after the treatment are posttest measures .

Random selection and assignment. Random selection is the process of randomly drawing a sample from a population or a sampling frame. This approach is typically employed in survey research, and ensures that each unit in the population has a positive chance of being selected into the sample. Random assignment, however, is a process of randomly assigning subjects to experimental or control groups. This is a standard practice in true experimental research to ensure that treatment groups are similar (equivalent) to each other and to the control group prior to treatment administration. Random selection is related to sampling, and is therefore more closely related to the external validity (generalisability) of findings. However, random assignment is related to design, and is therefore most related to internal validity. It is possible to have both random selection and random assignment in well-designed experimental research, but quasi-experimental research involves neither random selection nor random assignment.

Threats to internal validity. Although experimental designs are considered more rigorous than other research methods in terms of the internal validity of their inferences (by virtue of their ability to control causes through treatment manipulation), they are not immune to internal validity threats. Some of these threats to internal validity are described below, within the context of a study of the impact of a special remedial math tutoring program for improving the math abilities of high school students.

History threat is the possibility that the observed effects (dependent variables) are caused by extraneous or historical events rather than by the experimental treatment. For instance, students’ post-remedial math score improvement may have been caused by their preparation for a math exam at their school, rather than the remedial math program.

Maturation threat refers to the possibility that observed effects are caused by natural maturation of subjects (e.g., a general improvement in their intellectual ability to understand complex concepts) rather than the experimental treatment.

Testing threat is a threat in pre-post designs where subjects’ posttest responses are conditioned by their pretest responses. For instance, if students remember their answers from the pretest evaluation, they may tend to repeat them in the posttest exam.

Not conducting a pretest can help avoid this threat.

Instrumentation threat , which also occurs in pre-post designs, refers to the possibility that the difference between pretest and posttest scores is not due to the remedial math program, but due to changes in the administered test, such as the posttest having a higher or lower degree of difficulty than the pretest.

Mortality threat refers to the possibility that subjects may be dropping out of the study at differential rates between the treatment and control groups due to a systematic reason, such that the dropouts were mostly students who scored low on the pretest. If the low-performing students drop out, the results of the posttest will be artificially inflated by the preponderance of high-performing students.

Regression threat —also called a regression to the mean—refers to the statistical tendency of a group’s overall performance to regress toward the mean during a posttest rather than in the anticipated direction. For instance, if subjects scored high on a pretest, they will have a tendency to score lower on the posttest (closer to the mean) because their high scores (away from the mean) during the pretest were possibly a statistical aberration. This problem tends to be more prevalent in non-random samples and when the two measures are imperfectly correlated.

Two-group experimental designs

Pretest-posttest control group design . In this design, subjects are randomly assigned to treatment and control groups, subjected to an initial (pretest) measurement of the dependent variables of interest, the treatment group is administered a treatment (representing the independent variable of interest), and the dependent variables measured again (posttest). The notation of this design is shown in Figure 10.1.

Statistical analysis of this design involves a simple analysis of variance (ANOVA) between the treatment and control groups. The pretest-posttest design handles several threats to internal validity, such as maturation, testing, and regression, since these threats can be expected to influence both treatment and control groups in a similar (random) manner. The selection threat is controlled via random assignment. However, additional threats to internal validity may exist. For instance, mortality can be a problem if there are differential dropout rates between the two groups, and the pretest measurement may bias the posttest measurement—especially if the pretest introduces unusual topics or content.

Posttest -only control group design . This design is a simpler version of the pretest-posttest design where pretest measurements are omitted. The design notation is shown in Figure 10.2.

The treatment effect is measured simply as the difference in the posttest scores between the two groups:

The appropriate statistical analysis of this design is also a two-group analysis of variance (ANOVA). The simplicity of this design makes it more attractive than the pretest-posttest design in terms of internal validity. This design controls for maturation, testing, regression, selection, and pretest-posttest interaction, though the mortality threat may continue to exist.

Because the pretest measure is not a measurement of the dependent variable, but rather a covariate, the treatment effect is measured as the difference in the posttest scores between the treatment and control groups as:

Due to the presence of covariates, the right statistical analysis of this design is a two-group analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). This design has all the advantages of posttest-only design, but with internal validity due to the controlling of covariates. Covariance designs can also be extended to pretest-posttest control group design.

Factorial designs

Two-group designs are inadequate if your research requires manipulation of two or more independent variables (treatments). In such cases, you would need four or higher-group designs. Such designs, quite popular in experimental research, are commonly called factorial designs. Each independent variable in this design is called a factor , and each subdivision of a factor is called a level . Factorial designs enable the researcher to examine not only the individual effect of each treatment on the dependent variables (called main effects), but also their joint effect (called interaction effects).

In a factorial design, a main effect is said to exist if the dependent variable shows a significant difference between multiple levels of one factor, at all levels of other factors. No change in the dependent variable across factor levels is the null case (baseline), from which main effects are evaluated. In the above example, you may see a main effect of instructional type, instructional time, or both on learning outcomes. An interaction effect exists when the effect of differences in one factor depends upon the level of a second factor. In our example, if the effect of instructional type on learning outcomes is greater for three hours/week of instructional time than for one and a half hours/week, then we can say that there is an interaction effect between instructional type and instructional time on learning outcomes. Note that the presence of interaction effects dominate and make main effects irrelevant, and it is not meaningful to interpret main effects if interaction effects are significant.

Hybrid experimental designs

Hybrid designs are those that are formed by combining features of more established designs. Three such hybrid designs are randomised bocks design, Solomon four-group design, and switched replications design.

Randomised block design. This is a variation of the posttest-only or pretest-posttest control group design where the subject population can be grouped into relatively homogeneous subgroups (called blocks ) within which the experiment is replicated. For instance, if you want to replicate the same posttest-only design among university students and full-time working professionals (two homogeneous blocks), subjects in both blocks are randomly split between the treatment group (receiving the same treatment) and the control group (see Figure 10.5). The purpose of this design is to reduce the ‘noise’ or variance in data that may be attributable to differences between the blocks so that the actual effect of interest can be detected more accurately.

Solomon four-group design . In this design, the sample is divided into two treatment groups and two control groups. One treatment group and one control group receive the pretest, and the other two groups do not. This design represents a combination of posttest-only and pretest-posttest control group design, and is intended to test for the potential biasing effect of pretest measurement on posttest measures that tends to occur in pretest-posttest designs, but not in posttest-only designs. The design notation is shown in Figure 10.6.

Switched replication design . This is a two-group design implemented in two phases with three waves of measurement. The treatment group in the first phase serves as the control group in the second phase, and the control group in the first phase becomes the treatment group in the second phase, as illustrated in Figure 10.7. In other words, the original design is repeated or replicated temporally with treatment/control roles switched between the two groups. By the end of the study, all participants will have received the treatment either during the first or the second phase. This design is most feasible in organisational contexts where organisational programs (e.g., employee training) are implemented in a phased manner or are repeated at regular intervals.

Quasi-experimental designs

Quasi-experimental designs are almost identical to true experimental designs, but lacking one key ingredient: random assignment. For instance, one entire class section or one organisation is used as the treatment group, while another section of the same class or a different organisation in the same industry is used as the control group. This lack of random assignment potentially results in groups that are non-equivalent, such as one group possessing greater mastery of certain content than the other group, say by virtue of having a better teacher in a previous semester, which introduces the possibility of selection bias . Quasi-experimental designs are therefore inferior to true experimental designs in interval validity due to the presence of a variety of selection related threats such as selection-maturation threat (the treatment and control groups maturing at different rates), selection-history threat (the treatment and control groups being differentially impacted by extraneous or historical events), selection-regression threat (the treatment and control groups regressing toward the mean between pretest and posttest at different rates), selection-instrumentation threat (the treatment and control groups responding differently to the measurement), selection-testing (the treatment and control groups responding differently to the pretest), and selection-mortality (the treatment and control groups demonstrating differential dropout rates). Given these selection threats, it is generally preferable to avoid quasi-experimental designs to the greatest extent possible.

In addition, there are quite a few unique non-equivalent designs without corresponding true experimental design cousins. Some of the more useful of these designs are discussed next.

Regression discontinuity (RD) design . This is a non-equivalent pretest-posttest design where subjects are assigned to the treatment or control group based on a cut-off score on a preprogram measure. For instance, patients who are severely ill may be assigned to a treatment group to test the efficacy of a new drug or treatment protocol and those who are mildly ill are assigned to the control group. In another example, students who are lagging behind on standardised test scores may be selected for a remedial curriculum program intended to improve their performance, while those who score high on such tests are not selected from the remedial program.

Because of the use of a cut-off score, it is possible that the observed results may be a function of the cut-off score rather than the treatment, which introduces a new threat to internal validity. However, using the cut-off score also ensures that limited or costly resources are distributed to people who need them the most, rather than randomly across a population, while simultaneously allowing a quasi-experimental treatment. The control group scores in the RD design do not serve as a benchmark for comparing treatment group scores, given the systematic non-equivalence between the two groups. Rather, if there is no discontinuity between pretest and posttest scores in the control group, but such a discontinuity persists in the treatment group, then this discontinuity is viewed as evidence of the treatment effect.

Proxy pretest design . This design, shown in Figure 10.11, looks very similar to the standard NEGD (pretest-posttest) design, with one critical difference: the pretest score is collected after the treatment is administered. A typical application of this design is when a researcher is brought in to test the efficacy of a program (e.g., an educational program) after the program has already started and pretest data is not available. Under such circumstances, the best option for the researcher is often to use a different prerecorded measure, such as students’ grade point average before the start of the program, as a proxy for pretest data. A variation of the proxy pretest design is to use subjects’ posttest recollection of pretest data, which may be subject to recall bias, but nevertheless may provide a measure of perceived gain or change in the dependent variable.

Separate pretest-posttest samples design . This design is useful if it is not possible to collect pretest and posttest data from the same subjects for some reason. As shown in Figure 10.12, there are four groups in this design, but two groups come from a single non-equivalent group, while the other two groups come from a different non-equivalent group. For instance, say you want to test customer satisfaction with a new online service that is implemented in one city but not in another. In this case, customers in the first city serve as the treatment group and those in the second city constitute the control group. If it is not possible to obtain pretest and posttest measures from the same customers, you can measure customer satisfaction at one point in time, implement the new service program, and measure customer satisfaction (with a different set of customers) after the program is implemented. Customer satisfaction is also measured in the control group at the same times as in the treatment group, but without the new program implementation. The design is not particularly strong, because you cannot examine the changes in any specific customer’s satisfaction score before and after the implementation, but you can only examine average customer satisfaction scores. Despite the lower internal validity, this design may still be a useful way of collecting quasi-experimental data when pretest and posttest data is not available from the same subjects.

An interesting variation of the NEDV design is a pattern-matching NEDV design , which employs multiple outcome variables and a theory that explains how much each variable will be affected by the treatment. The researcher can then examine if the theoretical prediction is matched in actual observations. This pattern-matching technique—based on the degree of correspondence between theoretical and observed patterns—is a powerful way of alleviating internal validity concerns in the original NEDV design.

Perils of experimental research

Experimental research is one of the most difficult of research designs, and should not be taken lightly. This type of research is often best with a multitude of methodological problems. First, though experimental research requires theories for framing hypotheses for testing, much of current experimental research is atheoretical. Without theories, the hypotheses being tested tend to be ad hoc, possibly illogical, and meaningless. Second, many of the measurement instruments used in experimental research are not tested for reliability and validity, and are incomparable across studies. Consequently, results generated using such instruments are also incomparable. Third, often experimental research uses inappropriate research designs, such as irrelevant dependent variables, no interaction effects, no experimental controls, and non-equivalent stimulus across treatment groups. Findings from such studies tend to lack internal validity and are highly suspect. Fourth, the treatments (tasks) used in experimental research may be diverse, incomparable, and inconsistent across studies, and sometimes inappropriate for the subject population. For instance, undergraduate student subjects are often asked to pretend that they are marketing managers and asked to perform a complex budget allocation task in which they have no experience or expertise. The use of such inappropriate tasks, introduces new threats to internal validity (i.e., subject’s performance may be an artefact of the content or difficulty of the task setting), generates findings that are non-interpretable and meaningless, and makes integration of findings across studies impossible.

The design of proper experimental treatments is a very important task in experimental design, because the treatment is the raison d’etre of the experimental method, and must never be rushed or neglected. To design an adequate and appropriate task, researchers should use prevalidated tasks if available, conduct treatment manipulation checks to check for the adequacy of such tasks (by debriefing subjects after performing the assigned task), conduct pilot tests (repeatedly, if necessary), and if in doubt, use tasks that are simple and familiar for the respondent sample rather than tasks that are complex or unfamiliar.

In summary, this chapter introduced key concepts in the experimental design research method and introduced a variety of true experimental and quasi-experimental designs. Although these designs vary widely in internal validity, designs with less internal validity should not be overlooked and may sometimes be useful under specific circumstances and empirical contingencies.

Social Science Research: Principles, Methods and Practices (Revised edition) Copyright © 2019 by Anol Bhattacherjee is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Urgent Support

Engineering Graduate Studies

Hypothesis and Experimental Design

Jump to: Activity Examples | Resources

Two important elements of The Scientific Method that will help you design your research approach more efficiently are “Generating Hypotheses” and “Designing Controlled Experiments” to test these hypotheses. A well-designed experiment that you deeply understand will save time and resources and facilitate easier data analysis/interpretation. Many people reading this may be working on a project that focuses on designing a product, or discovery research where the hypothesis it is not immediately obvious. We encourage you to read on however as the exercise of generating a hypothesis will likely help you think about the assumptions you are making in your research and the physical principles your work builds upon.     

These activities will help you …  

• Begin formulating an appropriate hypothesis related to your research.  
• Apply a systematic process for designing experiments.  

What is a Hypothesis?  

A hypothesis is an “educated guess/prediction”  or  “ proposed explanation ”  of how a system will behave based on the available evidence .  A hypothesis is a starting point for further investigation and testing   because a hypothesis makes a prediction about the behavior of a measurable outcome of an experiment.  A hypothesis should be:  

• Testable – you can design an experiment to test it  
• Falsifiable – it can be proven wrong (note it cannot be “proved”)  
• Useful – the outcome must give valuable information  

A useful hypothesis may relate to the underlying question of your research. For example:  

“We hypothesize that therapy resistant cell populations will be enriched in hypoxic microenvironments. “  

“We hypothesize that  increasing the number of boreholes simulated in 3D geological models minimizes the variation of the geological model results.”    

Some research projects do not have an obvious hypothesis to test, but the design strategy/concept chosen is based on an underlying assumption about how the system being designed works (i.e. the hypothesis). For example:  

“We hypothesize that decreasing the baking temperature of the photoresist layer will reduce thermal expansion and device cracking”   

In this case the researcher is troubleshooting poor device quality and is proposing to vary different fabrication parameters (one being baking temperature). Understanding the assumptions (working hypotheses) of why different variables might improve device quality is useful as it provides a basis to prioritize what variables to focus on first. The core goal of this research is not to test a specific hypothesis, but using the scientific method to troubleshoot a design challenge will enable the researcher to understand the parameters that control the behavior of different designs and to identify a design that is successful more efficiently.  

In all the examples above, the hypothesis helps to guide the design of a useful and interpretable experiment with appropriate controls that rule out alternative explanations of the experimental observation. Hypotheses are therefore likely essential and useful parts of all research projects.  

Suggested Activity – Create a Hypothesis for Your Research  

Estimated time: 30 mins    

• Write down the parameters you are varying or testing in your experimental system or model and how you think the behaviour of the system is going to vary with these parameters.   
• (Alternative) If your project goal is to design a device, write down the parameters you believe control whether the device will work.  
• (Alternative) If your project goal involves optimizing a process,  write down the underlying physics or chemistry controlling the process you are studying.  
• With these parameters in mind, write down the key assumption(s) you are making about how your system works. 
• Try to formulate each one of these assumptions into a hypothesis that might be useful for your research project.  If you have multiple aims each one may have a separate hypothesis. Make sure the hypothesis meets each of the three key elements above.
• Share your hypothesis with a peer or your supervisor to discuss if this is a good hypothesis – is it testable? Does it make a useful prediction? Does it capture the key underlying assumptions your research is based upon?  

Remember that writing a good research hypothesis is challenging and will take a lot of careful thought about the underlying science that governs your system.  

Designing Experiments  

Designing experiments appropriately is very important to avoid wasting resources (time!) and to ensure results can be interpreted correctly. It is often very useful to discuss the design of your planned experiments in your meetings with your supervisor to get feedback before you start doing experiments. This will also ensure you and your supervisor have a consistent understanding of experimental design and that all the appropriate controls required to interpret your data have been considered.  

The factors that must be considered when you design experiments is going to depend on your specific area of research. S ome important things to think about when designing experiments include:  

Rationale:  What is the purpose of this experiment? Is this the best experiment I can do?  Does my experiment answer  any question ?  Does this experiment help answer  the question  I am trying to ask?  What hypothesis am I trying to test?  

Will my experiment be interpretable?   What controls can I use to distinguish my results from other potential explanations? Can I add a control to distinguish between explanations? Can I add a control to further test my hypothesis?  

Is my experiment/model rigorous?   What is the  sensitivity of the method  I am using and can it measure accurately what I want to measure? What  outcomes  (metrics) will I measure and is this measurement appropriate?  How many  replicates  (technical replicates versus independent replicates) will I do?  Am I only changing the  variable  that I am testing? What am I keeping constant? What  statistical tests  do I plan to carry out and what considerations are needed? Is my statistical design appropriate (power analysis, sufficient replicates)?  

What logistics do I need to consider?  Are the equipment/resources I need available? Do I need additional training or equipment access? Are there important safety or ethical issues/permits to consider? Are pilot experiments needed to assess feasibility and what would these be? What is my planned experimental protocol and are there important timing issues to consider? What experimental outputs and parameters need to be documented throughout experiment?  

This list is not exhaustive and you should consider what is missing for your particular situation.  

Suggested Activity – Design an Experiment Using a Template  

Estimated time: 45 min  

• Explore the excel template for experimental design ( Resource 1 )   or modelling  ( Resource 2 ).  A template like this is very useful for keeping track of protocols as well as improving the reproducibility of your experiments. Note this template is simply a  starting point  to get you thinking systematically and should be adapted to best suit  your  needs.   
• Fill out the template for an experiment or modelling project you are planning to complete soon.  
• Consider how you can modify this template to be more applicable to your specific project.  
• Using the template document, explain your experimental design/model design to a peer or your supervisor. Let them ask questions to understand your design and provide feedback. Alternatively, if there is a part of your design that you are unclear about this is a great starting point for a targeted and efficient discussion with your supervisor.   
• Revise your design based on feedback.  

Activity Examples

© 2024 Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering

• U of T Home
• Accessibility
• Student Data Practices
• Website Feedback

Experimental Method In Psychology

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

The experimental method involves the manipulation of variables to establish cause-and-effect relationships. The key features are controlled methods and the random allocation of participants into controlled and experimental groups .

What is an Experiment?

An experiment is an investigation in which a hypothesis is scientifically tested. An independent variable (the cause) is manipulated in an experiment, and the dependent variable (the effect) is measured; any extraneous variables are controlled.

An advantage is that experiments should be objective. The researcher’s views and opinions should not affect a study’s results. This is good as it makes the data more valid  and less biased.

There are three types of experiments you need to know:

1. Lab Experiment

A laboratory experiment in psychology is a research method in which the experimenter manipulates one or more independent variables and measures the effects on the dependent variable under controlled conditions.

A laboratory experiment is conducted under highly controlled conditions (not necessarily a laboratory) where accurate measurements are possible.

The researcher uses a standardized procedure to determine where the experiment will take place, at what time, with which participants, and in what circumstances.

Participants are randomly allocated to each independent variable group.

Examples are Milgram’s experiment on obedience and  Loftus and Palmer’s car crash study .

• Strength : It is easier to replicate (i.e., copy) a laboratory experiment. This is because a standardized procedure is used.
• Strength : They allow for precise control of extraneous and independent variables. This allows a cause-and-effect relationship to be established.
• Limitation : The artificiality of the setting may produce unnatural behavior that does not reflect real life, i.e., low ecological validity. This means it would not be possible to generalize the findings to a real-life setting.
• Limitation : Demand characteristics or experimenter effects may bias the results and become confounding variables .

2. Field Experiment

A field experiment is a research method in psychology that takes place in a natural, real-world setting. It is similar to a laboratory experiment in that the experimenter manipulates one or more independent variables and measures the effects on the dependent variable.

However, in a field experiment, the participants are unaware they are being studied, and the experimenter has less control over the extraneous variables .

Field experiments are often used to study social phenomena, such as altruism, obedience, and persuasion. They are also used to test the effectiveness of interventions in real-world settings, such as educational programs and public health campaigns.

An example is Holfing’s hospital study on obedience .

• Strength : behavior in a field experiment is more likely to reflect real life because of its natural setting, i.e., higher ecological validity than a lab experiment.
• Strength : Demand characteristics are less likely to affect the results, as participants may not know they are being studied. This occurs when the study is covert.
• Limitation : There is less control over extraneous variables that might bias the results. This makes it difficult for another researcher to replicate the study in exactly the same way.

3. Natural Experiment

A natural experiment in psychology is a research method in which the experimenter observes the effects of a naturally occurring event or situation on the dependent variable without manipulating any variables.

Natural experiments are conducted in the day (i.e., real life) environment of the participants, but here, the experimenter has no control over the independent variable as it occurs naturally in real life.

Natural experiments are often used to study psychological phenomena that would be difficult or unethical to study in a laboratory setting, such as the effects of natural disasters, policy changes, or social movements.

For example, Hodges and Tizard’s attachment research (1989) compared the long-term development of children who have been adopted, fostered, or returned to their mothers with a control group of children who had spent all their lives in their biological families.

Here is a fictional example of a natural experiment in psychology:

Researchers might compare academic achievement rates among students born before and after a major policy change that increased funding for education.

In this case, the independent variable is the timing of the policy change, and the dependent variable is academic achievement. The researchers would not be able to manipulate the independent variable, but they could observe its effects on the dependent variable.

• Strength : behavior in a natural experiment is more likely to reflect real life because of its natural setting, i.e., very high ecological validity.
• Strength : Demand characteristics are less likely to affect the results, as participants may not know they are being studied.
• Strength : It can be used in situations in which it would be ethically unacceptable to manipulate the independent variable, e.g., researching stress .
• Limitation : They may be more expensive and time-consuming than lab experiments.
• Limitation : There is no control over extraneous variables that might bias the results. This makes it difficult for another researcher to replicate the study in exactly the same way.

Key Terminology

Ecological validity.

The degree to which an investigation represents real-life experiences.

Experimenter effects

These are the ways that the experimenter can accidentally influence the participant through their appearance or behavior.

Demand characteristics

The clues in an experiment lead the participants to think they know what the researcher is looking for (e.g., the experimenter’s body language).

Independent variable (IV)

The variable the experimenter manipulates (i.e., changes) is assumed to have a direct effect on the dependent variable.

Dependent variable (DV)

Variable the experimenter measures. This is the outcome (i.e., the result) of a study.

Extraneous variables (EV)

All variables which are not independent variables but could affect the results (DV) of the experiment. EVs should be controlled where possible.

Confounding variables

Variable(s) that have affected the results (DV), apart from the IV. A confounding variable could be an extraneous variable that has not been controlled.

Random Allocation

Randomly allocating participants to independent variable conditions means that all participants should have an equal chance of participating in each condition.

The principle of random allocation is to avoid bias in how the experiment is carried out and limit the effects of participant variables.

Order effects

Changes in participants’ performance due to their repeating the same or similar test more than once. Examples of order effects include:

(i) practice effect: an improvement in performance on a task due to repetition, for example, because of familiarity with the task;

(ii) fatigue effect: a decrease in performance of a task due to repetition, for example, because of boredom or tiredness.

Experimental Research Design — 6 mistakes you should never make!

Since school days’ students perform scientific experiments that provide results that define and prove the laws and theorems in science. These experiments are laid on a strong foundation of experimental research designs.

An experimental research design helps researchers execute their research objectives with more clarity and transparency.

In this article, we will not only discuss the key aspects of experimental research designs but also the issues to avoid and problems to resolve while designing your research study.

Table of Contents

What Is Experimental Research Design?

Experimental research design is a framework of protocols and procedures created to conduct experimental research with a scientific approach using two sets of variables. Herein, the first set of variables acts as a constant, used to measure the differences of the second set. The best example of experimental research methods is quantitative research .

Experimental research helps a researcher gather the necessary data for making better research decisions and determining the facts of a research study.

When Can a Researcher Conduct Experimental Research?

A researcher can conduct experimental research in the following situations —

• When time is an important factor in establishing a relationship between the cause and effect.
• When there is an invariable or never-changing behavior between the cause and effect.
• Finally, when the researcher wishes to understand the importance of the cause and effect.

Importance of Experimental Research Design

To publish significant results, choosing a quality research design forms the foundation to build the research study. Moreover, effective research design helps establish quality decision-making procedures, structures the research to lead to easier data analysis, and addresses the main research question. Therefore, it is essential to cater undivided attention and time to create an experimental research design before beginning the practical experiment.

By creating a research design, a researcher is also giving oneself time to organize the research, set up relevant boundaries for the study, and increase the reliability of the results. Through all these efforts, one could also avoid inconclusive results. If any part of the research design is flawed, it will reflect on the quality of the results derived.

Types of Experimental Research Designs

Based on the methods used to collect data in experimental studies, the experimental research designs are of three primary types:

1. Pre-experimental Research Design

A research study could conduct pre-experimental research design when a group or many groups are under observation after implementing factors of cause and effect of the research. The pre-experimental design will help researchers understand whether further investigation is necessary for the groups under observation.

Pre-experimental research is of three types —

• One-shot Case Study Research Design
• One-group Pretest-posttest Research Design
• Static-group Comparison

2. True Experimental Research Design

A true experimental research design relies on statistical analysis to prove or disprove a researcher’s hypothesis. It is one of the most accurate forms of research because it provides specific scientific evidence. Furthermore, out of all the types of experimental designs, only a true experimental design can establish a cause-effect relationship within a group. However, in a true experiment, a researcher must satisfy these three factors —

• There is a control group that is not subjected to changes and an experimental group that will experience the changed variables
• A variable that can be manipulated by the researcher
• Random distribution of the variables

This type of experimental research is commonly observed in the physical sciences.

3. Quasi-experimental Research Design

The word “Quasi” means similarity. A quasi-experimental design is similar to a true experimental design. However, the difference between the two is the assignment of the control group. In this research design, an independent variable is manipulated, but the participants of a group are not randomly assigned. This type of research design is used in field settings where random assignment is either irrelevant or not required.

The classification of the research subjects, conditions, or groups determines the type of research design to be used.

Advantages of Experimental Research

Experimental research allows you to test your idea in a controlled environment before taking the research to clinical trials. Moreover, it provides the best method to test your theory because of the following advantages:

• Researchers have firm control over variables to obtain results.
• The subject does not impact the effectiveness of experimental research. Anyone can implement it for research purposes.
• The results are specific.
• Post results analysis, research findings from the same dataset can be repurposed for similar research ideas.
• Researchers can identify the cause and effect of the hypothesis and further analyze this relationship to determine in-depth ideas.
• Experimental research makes an ideal starting point. The collected data could be used as a foundation to build new research ideas for further studies.

6 Mistakes to Avoid While Designing Your Research

There is no order to this list, and any one of these issues can seriously compromise the quality of your research. You could refer to the list as a checklist of what to avoid while designing your research.

1. Invalid Theoretical Framework

Usually, researchers miss out on checking if their hypothesis is logical to be tested. If your research design does not have basic assumptions or postulates, then it is fundamentally flawed and you need to rework on your research framework.

2. Inadequate Literature Study

Without a comprehensive research literature review , it is difficult to identify and fill the knowledge and information gaps. Furthermore, you need to clearly state how your research will contribute to the research field, either by adding value to the pertinent literature or challenging previous findings and assumptions.

3. Insufficient or Incorrect Statistical Analysis

Statistical results are one of the most trusted scientific evidence. The ultimate goal of a research experiment is to gain valid and sustainable evidence. Therefore, incorrect statistical analysis could affect the quality of any quantitative research.

4. Undefined Research Problem

This is one of the most basic aspects of research design. The research problem statement must be clear and to do that, you must set the framework for the development of research questions that address the core problems.

5. Research Limitations

Every study has some type of limitations . You should anticipate and incorporate those limitations into your conclusion, as well as the basic research design. Include a statement in your manuscript about any perceived limitations, and how you considered them while designing your experiment and drawing the conclusion.

6. Ethical Implications

The most important yet less talked about topic is the ethical issue. Your research design must include ways to minimize any risk for your participants and also address the research problem or question at hand. If you cannot manage the ethical norms along with your research study, your research objectives and validity could be questioned.

Experimental Research Design Example

In an experimental design, a researcher gathers plant samples and then randomly assigns half the samples to photosynthesize in sunlight and the other half to be kept in a dark box without sunlight, while controlling all the other variables (nutrients, water, soil, etc.)

By comparing their outcomes in biochemical tests, the researcher can confirm that the changes in the plants were due to the sunlight and not the other variables.

Experimental research is often the final form of a study conducted in the research process which is considered to provide conclusive and specific results. But it is not meant for every research. It involves a lot of resources, time, and money and is not easy to conduct, unless a foundation of research is built. Yet it is widely used in research institutes and commercial industries, for its most conclusive results in the scientific approach.

Have you worked on research designs? How was your experience creating an experimental design? What difficulties did you face? Do write to us or comment below and share your insights on experimental research designs!

Frequently Asked Questions

Randomization is important in an experimental research because it ensures unbiased results of the experiment. It also measures the cause-effect relationship on a particular group of interest.

Experimental research design lay the foundation of a research and structures the research to establish quality decision making process.

There are 3 types of experimental research designs. These are pre-experimental research design, true experimental research design, and quasi experimental research design.

The difference between an experimental and a quasi-experimental design are: 1. The assignment of the control group in quasi experimental research is non-random, unlike true experimental design, which is randomly assigned. 2. Experimental research group always has a control group; on the other hand, it may not be always present in quasi experimental research.

Experimental research establishes a cause-effect relationship by testing a theory or hypothesis using experimental groups or control variables. In contrast, descriptive research describes a study or a topic by defining the variables under it and answering the questions related to the same.

good and valuable

Very very good

Good presentation.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Promoting Research

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

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

• Publishing Research

10 Tips to Prevent Research Papers From Being Retracted

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

• Industry News

Google Releases 2024 Scholar Metrics, Evaluates Impact of Scholarly Articles

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

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

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

• Reporting Research

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

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

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

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

Sign-up to read more

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Research questions, hypotheses and objectives

Patricia farrugia.

* Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, the

Bradley A. Petrisor

† Division of Orthopaedic Surgery and the

Forough Farrokhyar

‡ Departments of Surgery and

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

Mohit Bhandari

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

Objectives of this article

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

Research question

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

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

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

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

FINER criteria for a good research question

Adapted with permission from Wolters Kluwer Health. 2

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

PICOT criteria 1

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

Research hypothesis

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

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

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

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

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

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

Research objective

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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
• Open access
• Published: 11 September 2024

Cleaner fish with mirror self-recognition capacity precisely realize their body size based on their mental image

• Taiga Kobayashi 1 , 2 ,
• Masanori Kohda 1 , 2 ,
• Satoshi Awata 1 , 2 ,
• Redouan Bshary 3 &
• Shumpei Sogawa 1 , 2  

Scientific Reports volume  14 , Article number:  20202 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Animal behaviour
• Behavioural ecology

Animals exhibiting mirror self-recognition (MSR) are considered self-aware; however, studies on their level of self-awareness remain inconclusive. Recent research has indicated the potential for cleaner fish ( Labroides dimidiatus ) to possess a sophisticated level of private self-awareness. However, as this study revealed only an aspect of private self-awareness, further investigation into other elements is essential to substantiate this hypothesis. Here, we show that cleaner fish, having attained MSR, construct a mental image of their bodies by investigating their ability to recall body size. A size-based hierarchy governs the outcomes of their confrontations. The mirror-naïve fish behaved aggressively when presented with photographs of two unfamiliar conspecifics that were 10% larger and 10% smaller than their body sizes. After passing the MSR test, they refrained from aggression toward the larger photographs but still behaved aggressively toward the smaller ones without re-examining their mirror images. These findings suggest that cleaner fish accurately recognize their body size based on mental images of their bodies formed through MSR. Additionally, mirror-experienced fish frequently revisited the mirror when presented with an intimidating larger photograph, implying the potential use of mirrors for assessing body size. Our study established cleaner fish as the first non-human animal to be demonstrated to possess private self-awareness.

Introduction

Self-awareness refers to the capacity to focus on oneself and identify one’s own existence 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 . The mirror self-recognition (MSR) test, which assesses the ability to recognize one’s mirror reflection as oneself, is regarded as the most reliable evidence of self-awareness 5 , 6 , 7 . To attain MSR, individuals must have a degree of comprehension of their own existence 1 , 8 , 9 , 10 . MSR ability is demonstrated through the mark test, wherein subjects are surreptitiously provided with an exotic mark on their directly invisible body parts and subsequently observed for detection and attempts to touch or remove the mark only when exposed to a mirror 5 , 6 , 11 . Several vertebrates have passed the test and have been demonstrated to possess MSR ability, including the great apes 5 , 12 , 13 , dolphins 14 , 15 , 16 , elephants 17 , 18 , Eurasian magpies 19 , 20 , and cleaner fish 21 , 22 . In other words, these animals are considered to possess self-awareness 4 , 7 , 8 , 23 , 24 .

However, the level of self-awareness in animals that possess MSR ability remains controversial due to the inconclusive evidence provided by the mark test regarding private self-awareness 2 , 7 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 . Self-awareness is categorized into two classes based on the nature of self-information being processed 3 , 7 , 29 , 30 . The fundamental level is called public self-awareness, which enables individuals to focus on perceptual self-aspects observable by others, such as behavior or appearance 3 , 29 , 30 . Private self-awareness, which represents a more sophisticated level, allows individuals to focus on their internal aspects; that is, mental states, such as mental images, goals, self-memories, perceptions, intentions, and standards 3 , 29 , 30 . Some researchers regard MSR as an indicator of public self-awareness and object to the inclusion of private self-awareness in its interpretation 7 , 27 , 31 , 32 . For the first exposure to a mirror, individuals attain MSR by realizing the behavioral contingency between themselves and their mirror reflection, a hypothesis called the kinesthetic visual matching mechanism 31 , 32 . In this case, they focus on their own behavior, and this process can be interpreted through public self-awareness 7 , 27 , 31 , 32 . Conversely, once individuals have established MSR, they can recognize their mirror images as themselves without re-examining the contingency, like humans 2 , 9 , 25 . In this case, they maintain their visual image in their minds, suggesting evidence of private self-awareness 2 , 3 , 7 , 25 , 26 .

Recently, Kohda et al. showed that cleaner fish construct a mental image of their face by attaining MSR 33 . The authors excluded the interpretations involving the kinesthetic visual matching mechanism through compelling experiments using static photographs 33 . However, cleaner fish may possess a mental image specialized only for the face as a byproduct of their sophisticated individual recognition ability; they also construct facial representations of other conspecifics 33 . Furthermore, they possess the ability to distinguish numerous individuals of other species that interact in the wild 34 . Therefore, additional evidence regarding mental states is required to substantiate the idea that cleaner fish possess a general form of private self-awareness. In the present study, we focused on the ability to perceive body size, which is crucial for cleaner fish to survive in a competitive social environment 35 , 36 .

Body size significantly influences the behaviors of cleaner fish, particularly in intraspecific competition 35 , 36 . They establish a dominance hierarchy depending on body size within a stable group 36 , 37 . In general, larger individuals tend to have an advantage in confrontations, whereas smaller ones often incur costs such as injuries 38 . Before engaging in physical aggression against an unknown conspecific rival, cleaner fish often swim in parallel, presenting one side of their bodies to their opponent 35 . Through parallel swimming, fish may assess the approximate body size of their opponents as an indicator of their competitive ability, which may reduce the likelihood of futile conflicts 38 , 39 , 40 . In this context, fish can only estimate their approximate sizes relative to those of their opponents. However, after cleaner fish recognize their mirror reflection as themselves, they are able to estimate their body size more accurately by swimming parallel to the mirror, thereby enhancing precision in comparing their body size to that of a rival. Therefore, we investigated whether cleaner fish possessed the ability to recognize body size recalled from a mental image of their body.

We conducted a series of laboratory experiments to test this hypothesis. We prepared two sets of photographs of different cleaner fish that were 10% larger, equal in size, and 10% smaller than the focal fish (Fig.  1 ). None of the focal fish had previously encountered any individuals in these photographs. In the first session, we presented one set of photographs to 15 fish. Eight fish in the mirror treatment group were exposed to a mirror for one week following the first photograph presentation. The seven others in the control group were maintained for an equivalent duration without mirrors. In the second session, we presented another set of photographs. We predicted that the focal fish, having attained MSR, would construct an internal representation of their body size and refrain from aggressive interactions with larger photographs in the second session. In contrast, we expected that mirror-naïve fish would lack accurate awareness of their own body size and exhibit aggression toward all photographs in both the first and second sessions. Crucially, the focal fish were prevented from simultaneously observing both the photograph and the mirror by the partition placed in the experimental aquarium (Fig.  2 ). Therefore, they would need to visit the mirror and the photograph alternately to compare their body size with that of the opponent. We also examined their behavior toward the mirror to determine the likelihood of their intentional mirror use. We aimed to identify the constituent elements of mental states other than the mental image of the self-face in order to establish that cleaner fish possess private self-awareness.

An example of a series of photographs presented to the focal fish. The top photograph was enlarged by 10% relative to the actual size of the focal fish, the middle photograph was resized accordingly, and the bottom photograph was reduced to 10% of its actual size. These photographs were aligned to orient the heads to the right and adjusted for brightness, contrast, and exposure as necessary. None of the focal fish encountered any individuals in these photographs.

Schematic diagram of an experimental aquarium (450 × 300 × 300 mm 3 ): (a) frontal perspective and (b) aerial perspective. A photograph was displayed on the anterior right side of the aquarium wall from the outside. A mirror (225 × 260 mm 2 ) was positioned on the posterior left section of the aquarium wall from the exterior. An opaque partition (150 × 260 mm 2 ) was centrally placed within the aquarium to prevent the focal fish from simultaneously observing both the photograph and the mirror. An additional opaque side partition (50 × 260 mm 2 ) was attached behind the photograph to enable the fish refuge from the photograph. A small stone was positioned in front of the mirror to allow the fish to scrape their throats in the mark test. The behaviors of the fish were recorded using two cameras: a central camera to capture the entire aquarium and a side camera to monitor the blind spot behind the side partition.

The behavior of the focal fish toward the photographs

When presented with a photograph, the focal fish closely approached and often gazed at it for durations ranging from 0.5 to 2.0 s, with their dorsal and caudal fins spreading. This behavior is similar to the frontal display that fish often exhibit against competitors 35 . We defined this behavior as aggressive behavior against the photograph (Supplementary Movie 1 ; refer to Behavioral analysis in the Materials and methods). The longer the focal fish engaged in this behavior, the less likely they were to perceive the photograph as a formidable threat. We measured the duration of the initial aggressive interaction of the focal fish toward the photographs, as previous research has demonstrated that fish rapidly discriminate between photographs 41 . We compared this duration of aggressive behaviors among treatments (mirror and control), sessions (first and second presentation with the photographs), and photograph sizes (larger, the same, and smaller).

Consequently, we found a significant interaction between treatment and session [Fig.  3 , linear mixed model (LMM), F 1,65  = 9.45, p  = 0.003, partial η 2  = 0.13 (95% CI: 0.03, 1.00)]. Prior to encountering the mirror, the focal fish in the mirror treatment group exhibited aggressive behavior toward the photographs, regardless of size [see the three right white boxes in Fig.  3 , LMM: F 2,14  = 0.56, p  = 0.58, partial η 2  = 0.07 (95% CI: 0.00, 1.00)]. Having adequately interacted with a mirror, all mirror-experienced fish scraped their marked throat at least once and successfully passed the mark test (2.5 times ± 0.63 SEM/ 2 h, n = 8). After attaining MSR, they spent significantly less time engaging in aggressive interactions with photographs than when they were mirror-naïve [emmeans, t ratio = 5.16, df = 65, p  < 0.0001, partial η 2  = 0.29 (95% CI: 0.15, 1.00)]. When specifically analyzing fish that established MSR, the relative photograph size had a significant effect on the initial aggressive interactions [see the right three dark boxes in Fig.  3 , LMM, F 2,14  = 13.60, p  = 0.0005, partial η 2  = 0.66 (95% CI: 0.34, 1.00)]. They behaved less aggressively with the larger [emmeans, t ratio =  − 4.96, df = 14, p  = 0.0006, partial η 2  = 0.64 (95% CI: 0.33, 1.00)] and the same-sized photographs [emmeans, t ratio =  − 3.88, df = 14, p = 0.004, partial η 2  = 0.52 (95% CI: 0.19, 1.00)] compared to the smaller one. In contrast to the mirror-experienced individuals, the focal fish in the control group remained aggressive throughout the experiment [emmeans, t ratio = 0.62, df = 65, p  = 0.54, partial η 2  = 0.006 (95% CI: 0.00, 1.00)].

The initial duration of aggressive interaction exhibited by the focal fish toward the photographs. The horizontal axis depicts the size of the photographs, whereas the vertical axis represents the log-transformed duration of the initial aggressive behavior exhibited by the focal fish. The black lines within each box plot display the medians, with the upper and lower boundaries indicating the 75th and 25th quartiles, respectively. Whiskers above and below the box represent the maximum and minimum observed values, respectively. Dots denote outliers. The two white dots on the right boxes labeled 'Same' and 'Smaller,' as well as the two dark dots on the right boxes labeled 'Larger' and 'Same,' were each derived from the same individual. The six boxes on the left and right represent outcomes from the control and mirror treatment groups, respectively. White boxes indicate the results of the first session, whereas the dark ones indicate those of the second session. Numbers above the box plot denote the sample size.

The behavior of the focal fish to the mirror

After mirror exposure, the focal fish left the site of the photograph, visited the mirror, and repeatedly swam parallel to the mirror surface (see Supplementary Movie 2 , the dark boxes in Fig.  4 a). In contrast, the fish in the control group almost never exhibited those behaviors (0.062 s ± 0.043 SEM, n = 7, see the white boxes in Fig.  4 a). The relative photograph size significantly affected the duration of parallel swimming [LMM, F 2,14  = 12.20, p  = 0.0009, partial η 2  = 0.64 (95% CI: 0.30, 1.00)]. The fish that established MSR swam in parallel for a longer duration when presented with a larger photograph compared to either the same size one [emmeans, t ratio = 2.86, df = 14, p  = 0.032, partial η 2  = 0.37 (95% CI: 0.06, 1.00)] or the smaller one [emmeans, t ratio = 4.92, df = 14, p  = 0.0006, partial η 2  = 0.63 (95% CI: 0.33, 1.00)].

The mirror inspection behaviors exhibited by the focal fish: (a) the cumulative duration of parallel swimming along the mirror over 3 min and (b) the total number of times the fish swam back and forth between the photograph and the mirror within 3 min. The horizontal axis represents the size of the photographs. Black lines within each box represent the median values, with the upper and lower boundaries of the box denoting the 75th and 25th quartiles, respectively. Whiskers extending above and below the box indicate the maximum and minimum observed values. Dots represent outliers. White boxes depict outcomes from the control treatment group, while dark ones illustrate those from the mirror treatment group. The number above the box plot denotes the sample size.

In addition, the focal fish that established MSR often swam straight to the mirror, paused momentarily, or swam parallel to the surface, and then immediately returned directly to the site of the photograph (six out of eight for smaller photographs, six out of eight for same-sized ones, and eight out of eight for larger ones; see Supplementary Movie 3 , the dark boxes in Fig.  4 b). In contrast, fish in the control group rarely exhibited frequent reciprocation (see the white boxes in Fig.  4 b). The frequency of swimming back and forth between the photograph sites and the mirror was influenced by the relative photograph size [LMM, F 2,14  = 24.76, p  < 0.0001, partial η 2  = 0.78 (95% CI: 0.55, 1.00)]. The fish that established MSR swam back and forth more frequently in the presence of a larger photograph compared to either the same size one [emmeans, t ratio = 4.53, df = 14, p  = 0.001, partial η 2  = 0.59 (95% CI: 0.28, 1.00)] or the smaller one [emmeans, t ratio = 6.93, df = 14, p  < 0.0001, partial η 2  = 0.77 (95% CI: 0.55, 1.00)].

Our study shows that the focal fish behaved aggressively toward all three sizes of photographs without differences before their mirror experience but exhibited less aggression toward the larger and same-sized photographs compared to the smaller ones after attaining MSR. Together with the control treatment, the findings indicate that mirror-experienced fish may reduce their aggression not merely due to habituation to the photographs presented twice but rather by improving their ability to discriminate 10% size differences between themselves and the photograph by attaining MSR. Notably, there is a possibility that the focal fish immediately determined whether to approach or leave the photograph without revisiting the mirror, whereas the central partition prevented them from simultaneously comparing their mirror reflections with the photograph (Fig.  2 ). These findings suggest that cleaner fish construct a mental image of their body based on their mirror reflection by attaining MSR and make a decision whether to attack the photograph based on this mental representation. This implies that the focal fish were likely to use their internal images as a standard to assess the size hierarchy between themselves and the photographs. These findings suggest that cleaner fish would likely possess two mental states: a mental image of their body and internal standards for comparing body size 3 .

After leaving the photograph site, some focal fish that established MSR repeatedly swam parallel to the mirror. This parallel swimming is analogous to the behavior of cleaner fish observing their mirror-reflected bodies in previous studies 21 , 22 . This behavior is also similar to the lateral display, in which cleaner fish compare their body size relative to that of their opponent 35 , 39 , 40 . A previous study demonstrated that fish could assess their relative body size differences from their competitors without direct physical interactions 42 . Given that the focal fish had only visual cues, such as body size, it is possible that they engaged in an extensive examination of their own body size using their mirror image as a point of reference. Thus, it appears that cleaner fish visually recognize their body size by swimming in parallel with their mirror images.

When a larger photograph was presented, the cleaner fish that established MSR swam parallel along the mirror longer and swam back and forth between the sites of the photograph and the mirror more frequently. These findings suggest that these fish may have assessed their body size to decide whether to exhibit aggressive behavior toward the intimidating larger photograph. If they were merely attempting to scrutinize their body size in the photographs, they would have increased these behaviors when presented with a photograph of equal size, which represents the smallest size difference in comparison to themselves. It is unlikely that they merely fled from the photograph since they repeatedly returned to the larger photograph. Once they avoid larger and same-sized photographs, they appear to persist in interacting with their opponent and may elaboratively compare their body size relative to that of the photograph. Using their mirror image to assess their body size would require considerable time, particularly when confronted with a more formidable, larger photograph than that of the same size. These findings imply that cleaner fish establish MSR use their mirror images with the intention of reassessing their body size and seem to observe the mirror not for the purpose of scrutinizing their body size but rather to decide whether to initiate aggression. These interpretations suggest that cleaner fish may possess two mental states: intentions and goals 3 .

MSR is the most influential paradigm for demonstrating self-awareness in animals 24 , 26 , 43 . However, the conventional mark test, the most widely used method for investigating MSR, is unreliable for individuals or species demonstrating little interest in an ecologically meaningless mark and lacking motivation for its removal 11 , 22 , 33 , 44 . Nevertheless, failure is often interpreted as evidence of deficient self-awareness. To steadily evaluate the self-awareness of animals, a more widely applicable method that can elicit the motivation of animals to solve the task using their ecological characteristics is required 10 , 11 . Our study used the size principle in fish: individuals of different body sizes establish a size-dependent dominance hierarchy, whereas individuals of similar body sizes establish exclusive territories. This phenomenon is often observed in fish inhabiting stable social hierarchies, including cleaner fish 36 . Assessing relative body size may be easy for cleaner fish when the relative difference in body size is obvious (e.g., a 20% difference in size; refer to Supplementary Results), but this may be challenging with subtle differences. The focal fish that established MSR refrained from displaying aggressive behavior toward an opponent which they exhibited high aggression when mirror-naïve. If similar behavioral patterns are detected in other fish species under analogous experimental conditions, it may be inferred that these fish recognize their mirror images as themselves without conducting the mark test. In this manner, the present study proposes an alternative approach to demonstrate MSR and, thereby, self-awareness in a wide range of fish species with a dominance hierarchy based on body size.

This method can be further applied to conventional experiments on body size awareness. Animals with body size awareness possess knowledge of their relative body size as a representation formed visually or proprioceptively through daily experiences. Consequently, they can easily select an appropriate passageway without prior practice 45 , 46 . This method has the advantage of being simple enough to be applicable to a wide range of species; for example, human infants 45 , dogs 47 , 48 , crows 49 , snakes 50 , and even bumblebees 51 , 52 . However, the conventional procedure for demonstrating body size awareness does not reveal self-directed behavior 11 , 26 , 43 and is difficult to use as convincing evidence of self-awareness. Self-directed behavior refers to instances in which animals investigate or manipulate personal features, such as self-exploratory behavior using a mirror 1 , 11 , 26 . Indeed, self-directed behavior (e.g., re-examining one’s body size after failing to pass through a hole) has not been documented in the abovementioned studies. When the hole size closely approximates that of the subjects, they will encounter challenges in determining whether to pass through it. If they can correctly determine whether to pass through the gap closer in size to themselves after sufficient exposure to a mirror, or if they reassess their reflection when confronted with such a challenging task, it could be interpreted as self-directed behavior and suggestive of their possession of self-awareness. This procedure will be applicable to animals that use visual perception to assess body size.

The present study suggests that cleaner fish construct a mental image of their body after attaining MSR and make decisions regarding confrontations based on this mental representation. Cleaner fish would likely use mirrors to confirm their body size. This study makes a noteworthy contribution by accumulating evidence of four mental states, in addition to the mental image of faces, thereby providing more robust support for the hypothesis that cleaner fish possess private self-awareness. Cleaner fish will be the first non-human animals to be shown to possess private self-awareness. We propose a versatile method to test self-awareness, particularly extending to private self-awareness, without the need for the mirror mark test. If self-awareness is revealed in more animals than is currently acknowledged, we will be able to examine a more reliable evolutionary hypothesis on self-awareness. Interpreting the differences in the focal fish's responses to the photographs and the mirror through operant conditioning is challenging because they did not appear to receive any reinforcement for their responses. Instead, they may adjust their level of mirror image inspection based on uncertainty concerning their body size. These implications suggest that cleaner fish may possess metacognition, which refers to the awareness of their cognitive states 4 , 24 , 53 . Metacognition is considered a component of self-awareness equivalent to self-recognition 4 , 24 . Further research is required to ascertain whether cleaner fish possess this highest level of cognitive capacity. Our research substantiates the likelihood that cleaner fish possess private self-awareness and provides clues regarding the potential for metacognition. The present study will resolve disputes about the level of self-awareness in animals and serve as a pivotal milestone for future research to elucidate the evolutionary pathway of self-awareness.

Materials and methods

Subject animals and housing.

Cleaner wrasse ( Labroides dimidiatus ) is a monandric protogynous teleost fish that lives in coral reef habitats with complex intra- and inter-specific social structures 36 , 54 . Males establish their harems, which include several females, and a strict size-dependent dominance hierarchy maintains social relationships among individuals 36 , 37 . In particular, females of similar body sizes have exclusive territories, whereas those of different body sizes occasionally overlap in their territorial boundaries 36 , 54 . Cleaner fish primarily feed on ectoparasites or mucus on the surface of client fish that visit their territories 55 , 56 . Therefore, defending their territory against conspecific rivals of similar size is essential for their survival. They have approximately 2,300 daily interactions with more than 100 species 55 , 57 and can discriminate between individual clients 34 . Such complex social interactions are considered to develop various sophisticated cognitive capacities in addition to MSR 21 , 22 , 33 , such as tactical deception 58 , 59 and transitive inference 60 , 61 . They also provide rudimentary evidence of episodic-like memory 62 and theory of mind 63 .

We used 15 wild cleaner fish, ranging in total length from 58 to 83 mm (mean ± SD: 67.7 mm ± 6.8), obtained from a commercial supplier. As they were smaller than the minimum size of males, we estimated them as female 21 , 36 . Eight individuals (68.9 mm ± 7.6 SD) were used for the mirror treatment, during which they were exposed to a mirror between two sessions of photograph presentation. The remaining seven individuals (66.4 mm ± 6.0 SD) were used for the control treatment and were not exposed to a mirror throughout the experiment. The average total length of the focal fish did not differ between treatments (unpaired Student t-test, t = 0.68, df = 13, p  = 0.51). They were individually housed in their experimental aquaria (450 × 300 × 300 mm 3 ; Fig.  2 ) and maintained under a 14-h light: 10-h dark cycle in the laboratory of Osaka City University (Osaka Metropolitan University). A PVC tube (150 mm in length) was used as a sleeping shelter. The bottom of the aquarium was covered with fine coral sand. The water temperature was maintained at 24–26 °C, and the water was aerated and filtered to maintain optimal conditions. The fish were daily supplied with small portions of diced fresh prawn in the morning and artificial flake food (TetraMin®) in the evening. The conditions under which the cleaner fish were kept were identical to those used in previous studies conducted in our laboratory 21 , 22 , 33 .

Stimulus photographs

We took photographs of 12 cleaner fish that had not been encountered by any focal fish using a Nikon D610 digital camera and edited them using the image editing software GIMP ver. 2.10.18 ( https://download.gimp.org/gimp/v2.10/windows/ ). Eight distinct photographs were randomly selected from the total set of 12 photographs for each focal fish. We cut photographs along the outline, aligned them to orient their heads to the right, and adjusted for brightness, contrast, and exposure as necessary. Subsequently, we resized the photographs into three distinct patterns based on the total length of each focal fish: two larger photographs were enlarged by 10%, two smaller photographs were reduced by 10%, and four photographs were of equal size (Fig.  1 ). A 10% size difference would be an appropriate threshold as mirror-naïve fish did not exhibit aggression toward conspecific photographs that were 20% larger than themselves but still engaged in aggression toward photographs that were 10% larger in preliminary trials (Supplementary Results). The photographs were printed on commercially available photographic paper using an inkjet printer (EPSON EP-30VA), cut along the outline, and laminated.

Experimental aquaria

Figure  2 shows the experimental aquarium (a: frontal perspective, b: aerial perspective). The photograph was attached to a white polypropylene plastic sheet (225 × 260 mm 2 ) and presented at the center of the anterior right side of the aquarium wall from the outside. A mirror (225 × 260 mm 2 ) was positioned on the posterior left section of the aquarium wall from the exterior. An opaque plastic sheet (225 × 260 mm 2 ) was interposed between the mirror and the aquarium wall to shield the focal fish from observing the mirror surface until the end of the first session of photograph presentation in the mirror treatment and throughout the control treatment. The central (150 × 260 mm 2 ) and side partitions (50 × 260 mm 2 ) were constructed of opaque white corrugated plastic boards. The central partition was placed at the center of the aquarium as a visual barrier between the mirror and the photograph, whereas the side partition was attached behind the photograph to enable the focal fish to take refuge from the photograph. A small stone was placed in front of the mirror, which enabled fish in the mirror treatment group to scrape their throats during the mark test. This behavior provides evidence that cleaner fish are sufficiently exposed to the mirror to attain MSR 21 , 22 . We recorded the behavior of all focal fish in the presence of a photograph and mirror-experienced fish during the mark test using two digital video cameras (SONY HDR-CX470) from two angles: 1) the front, to capture the entire aquarium (central camera, 1 m away from the aquarium), and 2) the opposite side to the mirror, to capture the blind spots behind the side partition (side camera, 0.5 m away from the aquarium). The PVC tube and baited prawn were removed from the aquarium for the entire duration of the recording.

Experimental procedure

The experiment was conducted in the laboratory at Osaka City University (Osaka Metropolitan University) between July 2020 and April 2021. We measured the total length of the focal fish by encasing them within a Ziplock bag and employing an exterior ruler to measure them to the nearest millimeter prior to their introduction to the experimental aquarium. All focal fish were habituated to the experimental aquaria for at least one week prior to the commencement of the experiment. To acclimate the fish to the photographs, two same-sized photographs were presented to them individually for a period of 3 min each, with a two-day interval between presentations. We did not include the data from this habituation phase in the results. After confirming that all fish exhibited aggressive behavior toward the photographs in the habituation phase, larger, same-sized, and smaller photographs were randomly presented to the fish individually for 3 min each, two days apart (first session). A previous study demonstrated that one week was sufficient for cleaner fish to establish MSR 22 ; hence, the fish in the mirror treatment group were exposed to a mirror for one week. Following this mirror presentation, we conducted the mark test to assess whether the fish had established MSR. We followed the injection procedures outlined in previous studies 21 , 22 . In the mark test, all eight fish scraped their throats at least once. Two days after the test, additional larger, same-sized, and smaller photographs, distinct from those used in the first session, were presented to the fish that passed the mark test (second session). The procedure for presenting photographs was identical to that used in the first session. In the control treatment, photographs were presented in the same manner as in the mirror treatment. However, these seven fish were not exposed to the mirror between the two sessions of photograph presentation.

Behavioral analysis

To evaluate the aggression levels of the focal fish toward the photographs, we examined their initial responses to the photographs shortly after their presentation. Although most individuals rarely attacked them physically (11 out of 15), they approached photographs (within 15 cm) and briefly gazed at them (ranging from 0.5 to 2.0 s) by rapidly and repeatedly turning their heads with their dorsal and caudal fins extended (Supplementary Movie 1 ). This series of spontaneous approaches toward a photograph suggested that the focal fish perceived the photograph as an opponent that could be excluded by attacking it. We considered the duration of this behavior as indicative of aggressiveness toward the photographs. A previous study demonstrated that fish rapidly discriminate a photograph (≤ 0.5 s) based on the face 41 ; hence, we measured the initial duration of the focal fish orienting their head toward a photograph from the moment they first approached it until they left in both sessions using the annotation software ELAN ver. 5.9 ( https://archive.mpi.nl/tla/elan/previous ).

When a photograph was presented, the mirror-experienced fish occasionally ceased swimming or swam parallel along the mirror (5.25 times ± 0.98 SEM for larger photographs, 2.75 ± 0.73 for same-sized ones, and 1.00 ± 0.38 for smaller ones, Supplementary Movie 2 ). They often swam parallel to the mirror with their fins extended, similar to the lateral display 35 , a behavior performed to compare body size with that of an opponent 39 . Because cleaner fish that established MSR should be aware that their mirror image is a self-reflection, they should accurately recognize their body size based on their mirror image. We summed the durations of all parallel swimming in front of the mirror as an index to assess body size.

After leaving a position in front of the photograph, the fish that established MSR would voluntarily swim toward and observe the mirror before directly returning to the place in front of the photograph (Supplementary Movie 3 ). We assumed that the fish were comparing their body size with that of the photograph as the central partition prevented them from simultaneously observing both the mirror and the photograph (Fig.  2 ). We also quantified the frequency of swimming back and forth in front of the mirror and in the photographs.

All three behaviors discussed above were analyzed by a blinded observer (24 of 90 videos). The data analyzed by an experimenter and a blinded observer exhibited a high correlation (Pearson's correlation coefficient, initial interaction with the photograph: r = 0.79, n = 24; parallel swimming: r = 0.86, n = 12; reciprocal swimming: r = 0.89, n = 12).

Statistics and reproducibility

Statistical analyses were conducted using R software version 4.3.0 64 . For the initial duration of interaction with the photographs, we used a linear mixed model (LMM) with treatments (mirror and control), sessions (first and second presentations with photographs), and photograph sizes (10% larger, the same size, and 10% smaller) as fixed factors and individual ID as a random factor 65 . Data were ln-transformed to satisfy the assumptions of normality. The residuals exhibited a normal distribution (Shapiro–Wilk normality test: W = 0.98, p  = 0.14) and homoscedasticity of variances (Bartlett test: K 2  = 10.12, df = 11, p  = 0.52). The fixed effects accounted for 37% of the variance. Post-hoc analyses were conducted subsequent to any significant model results to identify the conditions influencing the overall significant outcomes by employing emmeans 66 . Effect sizes (partial η 2 ) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the LMMs and emmeans.

In addition to the initial interaction with the photograph, we collected data on the total duration of swimming parallel to the mirror and the frequency of swimming back and forth between the photograph and the mirror during the second session. Initially, we preferred to employ comprehensive models, including treatments and photograph sizes, as fixed factors. However, conducting this analysis was impossible because of the minimal variation in the data for the control group, in which more than 90% of the values were zero. Therefore, we initially summed the cumulative duration of parallel swimming or the frequency of reciprocal swimming for each individual over three trials with photographs of different sizes, followed by an exact Wilcoxon rank sum test 67 . Based on the significant outcomes of this test (parallel swimming: W = 0, p  = 0.0003; reciprocal swimming: W = 2, p  = 0.001), we analyzed only the data from the mirror treatment group to ascertain whether individuals exhibited differential responses to photographs of different sizes. We fitted only the photograph sizes in the LMM as a fixed factor with individual ID as a random factor. The data were subjected to ln (x + 0.001) transformation to meet the normality assumptions due to the presence of zero in the data. The parallel swimming model adhered to a normal distribution (W = 0.98, p  = 0.93) and exhibited homoscedasticity (K 2  = 1.4, df = 2, p  = 0.50). Similarly, the reciprocal swimming model conformed to a normal distribution (W = 0.98, p  = 0.95) and exhibited homoscedasticity (K 2  = 1.8, df = 2, p  = 0.40). Fixed effects explained 42% of the variance in parallel swimming and 39% in reciprocal swimming.

Analyses of the duration of parallel swimming and the frequency of reciprocal swimming highlighted the non-standard distribution of data in the control treatment. Therefore, we conducted an additional LMM analysis of the initial interaction duration with the photographs. This analysis was specifically limited to the second session of the mirror treatment, with photograph size and individual ID treated as fixed and random factors, respectively. The data underwent ln transformation to satisfy normality assumptions. The model conformed to a normal distribution (W = 0.93, p  = 0.076) and demonstrated homoscedasticity (K 2  = 0.14, df = 2, p  = 0.93). Fixed effects explained only 14% of the variance, whereas the random effect (individual) exhibited a substantial influence by explaining 73.9% of the variance. These statistical outcomes may explain why the complete model showed only a two-way interaction between treatments and sessions rather than a three-way interaction involving treatments, sessions, and photograph sizes.

Ethics statement

All of the experiments were conducted in accordance with the Animal Welfare Guidelines of the Japan Ethological Society and ARRIVE guidelines ( https://arriveguidelines.org ). The protocol for this study including the mark injection procedure received approval by the Animal Care and Use Committee of the Osaka Metropolitan University (No. S0088).

Data availability

All of the data are accessible within the main text and supplementary materials.

Gallup, G. G. Self recognition in primates: A comparative approach to the bidirectional properties of consciousness. Am. Psychol. 32 , 329–338 (1977).

Article   Google Scholar  

Gallup, G. G. Do minds exist in species other than our own?. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 9 , 631–641 (1985).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Morin, A. Levels of consciousness and self-awareness: A comparison and integration of various neurocognitive views. Conscious. Cogn. 15 , 358–371 (2006).

Basile, B. M., Brown, E. K. & Hampton, R. R. Self-awareness. In Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior (eds Vonk, J. & Shackelford, T.) 1–15 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47829-6_1560-1 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Gallup, G. G. Chimpanzees: Self-recognition. Science 167 , 86–87 (1970).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Suddendorf, T. & Butler, D. L. The nature of visual self-recognition. Trends Cogn. Sci. 17 , 121–127 (2013).

Morin, A. Implications of mirror self-recognition for self-awareness. Psychol. Conscious. Theory Res. Pract. https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000270 (2021).

Gallup, G. G. Self-awareness in primates: The sense of identity distinguishes man from most but perhaps not all other forms of life. Am. Sci. 67 , 417–421 (1979).

ADS   Google Scholar  

Morin, A. & DeBlois, S. Gallup’s mirrors: More than an operationalization of self-awareness in primates?. Psychol. Rep. 65 , 287–291 (1989).

Kakrada, E. & Colombo, M. Beyond the mark: Signatures of self-recognition in fish. Learn. Behav. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-023-00586-0 (2023).

Kakrada, E. & Colombo, M. Mirror mirror on the wall, it’s not the mark I care about at all. Learn. Motiv. 77 , 101785 (2022).

Anderson, J. R. & Gallup, G. G. Mirror self-recognition: A review and critique of attempts to promote and engineer self-recognition in primates. Primates 56 , 317–326 (2015).

Murray, L. E., Anderson, J. R. & Gallup, G. G. Mirror self-recognition in gorillas ( Gorilla gorilla gorilla ): A review and evaluation of mark test replications and variants. Anim. Cogn. 25 , 783–792 (2022).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Reiss, D. & Marino, L. Mirror self-recognition in the bottlenose dolphin: A case of cognitive convergence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 98 , 5937–5942 (2001).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Morrison, R. & Reiss, D. Precocious development of self-awareness in dolphins. PLoS One 13 , e0189813 (2018).

Loth, A., Güntürkün, O., von Fersen, L. & Janik, V. M. Through the looking glass: How do marked dolphins use mirrors and what does it mean?. Anim. Cogn. 25 , 1151–1160 (2022).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Plotnik, J. M., de Waal, F. B. M. & Reiss, D. Self-recognition in an Asian elephant. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 103 , 17053–17057 (2006).

Plotnik, J. M., de Waal, F. B. M., Moore, D. III. & Reiss, D. Self-recognition in the Asian elephant and future directions for cognitive research with elephants in zoological settings. Zoo Biol. 29 , 179–191 (2010).

Prior, H., Schwarz, A. & Güntürkün, O. Mirror-induced behavior in the magpie ( Pica pica ): Evidence of self-recognition. PLOS Biol. 6 , e202 (2008).

Soler, M., Colmenero, J. M., Pérez-Contreras, T. & Peralta-Sánchez, J. M. Replication of the mirror mark test experiment in the magpie ( Pica pica ) does not provide evidence of self-recognition. J. Comp. Psychol. 134 , 363–371 (2020).

Kohda, M. et al. If a fish can pass the mark test, what are the implications for consciousness and self-awareness testing in animals?. PLOS Biol. 17 , e3000021 (2019).

Kohda, M. et al. Further evidence for the capacity of mirror self-recognition in cleaner fish and the significance of ecologically relevant marks. PLOS Biol. 20 , e3001529 (2022).

Hubená, P., Horký, P. & Slavík, O. Fish self-awareness: Limits of current knowledge and theoretical expectations. Anim. Cogn. 25 , 447–461 (2022).

Lage, C. A., Wolmarans, D. W. & Mograbi, D. C. An evolutionary view of self-awareness. Behav. Processes 194 , 104543 (2022).

Gallup, G. G. Self-awareness and the emergence of mind in primates. Am. J. Primatol. 2 , 237–248 (1982).

Gallup, G. G. & Anderson, J. R. Self-recognition in animals: Where do we stand 50 years later? Lessons from cleaner wrasse and other species. Psychol. Conscious. Theory Res. Pract. 7 , 46–58 (2020).

Google Scholar  

Morin, A. Book review: Let’s face it. Evol. Psychol. 1 , 147470490300100130 (2003).

Brandl, J. L. The puzzle of mirror self-recognition. Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci. 17 , 279–304 (2018).

Fenigstein, A., Scheier, M. F. & Buss, A. H. Public and private self-consciousness: Assessment and theory. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 43 , 522–527 (1975).

Froming, W. J., Walker, G. R. & Lopyan, K. J. Public and private self-awareness: When personal attitudes conflict with societal expectations. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 18 , 476–487 (1982).

Mitchell, R. W. Mental models of mirror-self-recognition: Two theories. New Ideas Psychol. 11 , 295–325 (1993).

Mitchell, R. W. Kinesthetic-visual matching and the self-concept as explanations of mirror-self-recognition. J. Theory Soc. Behav. 27 , 17–39 (1997).

Kohda, M. et al. Cleaner fish recognize self in a mirror via self-face recognition like humans. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 120 , e2208420120 (2023).

Tebbich, S., Bshary, R. & Grutter, A. Cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus recognise familiar clients. Anim. Cogn. 5 , 139–145 (2002).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Potts, G. W. The ethology of Labroides dimidiatus (cuv. & val.) (Labridae, Pisces) on Aldabra. Anim. Behav. 21 , 250–291 (1973).

Kuwamura, T. Social Structure of the protogynous fish Labroides dimidiatus . Publ. Seto Mar. Biol. Lab. 29 , 117–177 (1984).

Robertson, D. R. Social control of sex reversal in a coral-reef fish. Science 177 , 1007–1009 (1972).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Arnott, G. & Elwood, R. W. Information gathering and decision making about resource value in animal contests. Anim. Behav. 76 , 529–542 (2008).

Butler, J. M. & Maruska, K. P. The mechanosensory lateral line is used to assess opponents and mediate aggressive behaviors during territorial interactions in an African cichlid fish. J. Exp. Biol. 218 , 3284–3294 (2015).

Li, C.-Y., Curtis, C. & Earley, R. L. Nonreversing mirrors elicit behaviour that more accurately predicts performance against live opponents. Anim. Behav. 137 , 95–105 (2018).

Kohda, M. et al. Facial recognition in a group-living cichlid fish. PLOS ONE 10 , e0142552 (2015).

Enquist, M., Ljungberg, T. & Zandor, A. Visual assessment of fighting ability in the cichlid fish Nannacara anomala . Anim. Behav. 35 , 1262–1264 (1987).

Gallup, G. G. & Anderson, J. R. The, “olfactory mirror” and other recent attempts to demonstrate self-recognition in non-primate species. Behav. Processes 148 , 16–19 (2018).

Rajala, A. Z., Reininger, K. R., Lancaster, K. M. & Populin, L. C. Rhesus monkeys ( Macaca mulatta ) do recognize themselves in the mirror: Implications for the evolution of self-recognition. PLOS ONE 5 , e12865 (2010).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Brownell, C. A., Zerwas, S. & Ramani, G. B. “So big”: The development of body self-awareness in toddlers. Child Dev. 78 , 1426–1440 (2007).

Dale, R. & Plotnik, J. M. Elephants know when their bodies are obstacles to success in a novel transfer task. Sci. Rep. 7 , 46309 (2017).

Lenkei, R., Faragó, T., Kovács, D., Zsilák, B. & Pongrácz, P. That dog won’t fit: body size awareness in dogs. Anim. Cogn. 23 , 337–350 (2020).

Pongrácz, P., Dobos, P., Faragó, T., Kubinyi, E. & Lenkei, R. Body size awareness matters when dogs decide whether to detour an obstacle or opt for a shortcut. Sci. Rep. 13 , 17899 (2023).

Khvatov, I. A. et al. Hooded crows ( Corvus cornix ) may be aware of their own body size. Front. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.769397 (2021).

Khvatov, I. A., Sokolov, A. Y. & Kharitonov, A. N. Snakes Elaphe radiata may acquire awareness of their body limits when trying to hide in a shelter. Behav. Sci. 9 , 67 (2019).

Ravi, S. et al. Bumblebees perceive the spatial layout of their environment in relation to their body size and form to minimize inflight collisions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117 , 31494–31499 (2020).

Brebner, J. & Chittka, L. Animal cognition: The self-image of a bumblebee. Curr. Biol. 31 , R207–R209 (2021).

Flavell, J. H. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. Am. Psychol. 34 , 906–911 (1979).

Sakai, Y., Kohda, M. & Kuwamura, T. Effect of changing harem on timing of sex change in female cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus . Anim. Behav. 62 , 251–257 (2001).

Grutter, A. S. Relationship between cleaning rates and ectoparasite loads in coral reef fishes. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 118 , 51–58 (1995).

Grutter, A. S. Cleaner fish really do clean. Nature 398 , 672–673 (1999).

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Grutter, A. S. & Poulin, R. Cleaning of coral reef fishes by the wrasse Labroides dimidiatus : Influence of client body size and phylogeny. Copeia 1998 , 120–127 (1998).

Bshary, R. Building up relationships in asymmetric co-operation games between the cleaner wrasse Labroides dimidiatus and client reef fish. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 52 , 365–371 (2002).

Bshary, R. & Grutter, A. S. Image scoring and cooperation in a cleaner fish mutualism. Nature 441 , 975–978 (2006).

Hotta, T. et al. Transitive inference in cleaner wrasses ( Labroides dimidiatus ). PLOS ONE 15 , e0237817 (2020).

Bonin, L. & Bshary, R. In the absence of extensive initial training, cleaner wrasse Labroides dimidiatus fail a transitive inference task. PLOS ONE 18 , e0287402 (2023).

Salwiczek, L. H. & Bshary, R. Cleaner wrasses keep track of the ‘when’ and ‘what’ in a foraging task. Ethology 117 , 939–948 (2011).

McAuliffe, K. et al. Cleaner fish are sensitive to what their partners can and cannot see. Commun. Biol. 4 , 1–7 (2021).

R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing (R foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria, 2023).

Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. & Christensen, R. lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. J. Stat. Softw. 82 , 1–26 (2017).

Lenth, R. V. Estimated marginal means, aka Least-squares means. (2021).

Hothorn, T. & Hornik, K. Exact distributions for rank and permutation tests. (2022).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the members of the Laboratory of Animal Sociology at Osaka City University (Osaka Metropolitan University) for their insightful discussions. We thank Naoki Kubo for his collaboration in conducting blind behavioral observations and Radu Slobodeanu for his guidance on statistical analyses. We would also like to thank Editage ( https://www.editage.jp ) for the English language editing.

This study was financially supported by JST SPRING (JPMJSP2139 to T.K.), JSPS KAKENHI (23KJ1829 to T.K., 19F19713 and 20K20630 to M.K., 22H02703 to S.A., and 20K20154 to S.S.), Swiss Science Foundation (310030_192673 to R.B.), and an OCU Strategic Research Grant 2018–2019 (to M.K. and S.A.).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Laboratory of Animal Sociology, Department of Biology, Graduate School of Science, Osaka Metropolitan University, Osaka, Japan

Taiga Kobayashi, Masanori Kohda, Satoshi Awata & Shumpei Sogawa

Laboratory of Animal Sociology, Department of Biology and Geosciences, Graduate School of Science, Osaka City University, Osaka, Japan

Institute of Zoology, University of Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel, Switzerland

Redouan Bshary

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

T.K., M.K., and S.S. designed the study. All authors acquired the funding. T.K. and S.S. collected data. T.K., S.A., and R.B. performed formal analyses. T.K., M.K., and S.S. wrote the manuscript. All authors contributed to reviewing, editing, and approving the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Taiga Kobayashi or Shumpei Sogawa .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Supplementary Information

Supplementary information 1., supplementary information 2..

Supplementary Video 1.

Supplementary Video 2.

Supplementary Video 3.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, 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 changes were made. 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/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Kobayashi, T., Kohda, M., Awata, S. et al. Cleaner fish with mirror self-recognition capacity precisely realize their body size based on their mental image. Sci Rep 14 , 20202 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70138-7

Download citation

Received : 16 May 2024

Accepted : 13 August 2024

Published : 11 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70138-7

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

• Private self-awareness
• Mental image
• Mirror self-recognition
• Body size awareness
• Labroides dimidiatus

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

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

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

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Author Biographies
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Mechanisms linking social media use and sleep in emerging adults in the united states.

1. Introduction

1.1. emotional investment in social media, 1.2. mechanisms linking social media and sleep, 1.3. aims and hypotheses, 2. materials and methods, 2.1. participants and procedures, 2.2. measures, 2.2.1. social media use, 2.2.2. sleep characteristics, 2.2.3. negative social comparison on social media, 2.2.4. pre-sleep arousal, 2.2.5. demographic characteristics, 2.3. data analysis, 3.1. descriptive analyses, 3.2. aim 1: association of social media use and sleep characteristics, 3.3. aim 2: mechanisms linking social media use and sleep characteristics, 3.3.1. sleep quality, 3.3.2. insomnia severity, 4. discussion, strengths, limitations, and future directions, 5. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Owens, J.; Adolescent Sleep Working Group; Committee on Adolescence; Au, R.; Carskadon, M.; Millman, R.; Wolfson, A.; Braverman, P.K.; Adelman, W.P.; Breuner, C.C.; et al. Insufficient Sleep in Adolescents and Young Adults: An Update on Causes and Consequences. Pediatrics 2014 , 134 , e921–e932. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gradisar, M.; Wolfson, A.R.; Harvey, A.G.; Hale, L.; Rosenberg, R.; Czeisler, C.A. The Sleep and Technology Use of Americans: Findings from the National Sleep Foundation’s 2011 Sleep in America Poll. J. Clin. Sleep Med. 2013 , 9 , 1291–1299. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Rubin, A.; Mangal, R.; Stead, T.S.; Walker, J.; Ganti, L. The extent of sleep deprivation and daytime sleepiness in young adults. Health Psychol. Res. 2023 , 11 , 74555. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alonzo, R.; Hussain, J.; Stranges, S.; Anderson, K.K. Interplay between social media use, sleep quality, and mental health in youth: A systematic review. Sleep Med. Rev. 2021 , 56 , 101414. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Auxier, B.; Anderson, M. Social Media Use in 2021 ; Pew Research Center: Washington, DC, USA, 2021. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yu, D.J.; Wing, Y.K.; Li, T.M.H.; Chan, N.Y. The Impact of Social Media Use on Sleep and Mental Health in Youth: A Scoping Review. Curr. Psychiatry Rep. 2024 , 26 , 104–119. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Levenson, J.C.; Shensa, A.; Sidani, J.E.; Colditz, J.B.; Primack, B.A. The association between social media use and sleep disturbance among young adults. Prev. Med. 2016 , 85 , 36–41. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Scott, H.; Biello, S.M.; Woods, H.C. Social media use and adolescent sleep patterns: Cross-sectional findings from the UK millennium cohort study. BMJ Open 2019 , 9 , e031161. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Scott, H.; Woods, H.C. Fear of missing out and sleep: Cognitive behavioural factors in adolescents’ nighttime social media use. J. Adolesc. 2018 , 68 , 61–65. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Levenson, J.C.; Shensa, A.; Sidani, J.E.; Colditz, J.B.; Primack, B.A. Social Media Use Before Bed and Sleep Disturbance among Young Adults in the United States: A Nationally Representative Study. Sleep 2017 , 40 , zsx113. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Woods, H.C.; Scott, H. #Sleepyteens: Social media use in adolescence is associated with poor sleep quality, anxiety, depression and low self-esteem. J. Adolesc. 2016 , 51 , 41–49. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alsunni, A.A.; Latif, R. Higher emotional investment in social media is related to anxiety and depression in university students. J. Taibah Univ. Med. Sci. 2021 , 16 , 247–252. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Festinger, L. A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Hum. Relat. 1954 , 7 , 117–140. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McNee, S.; Woods, H.C. Pre-sleep Cognitive Influence of Night-time Social Media Use and Social Comparison Behaviour in Young Women. PsyArXiv 2019 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Reer, F.; Tang, W.Y.; Quandt, T. Psychosocial well-being and social media engagement: The mediating roles of social comparison orientation and fear of missing out. New Media Soc. 2019 , 21 , 1486–1505. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vogel, E.A.; Rose, J.P.; Okdie, B.M.; Eckles, K.; Franz, B. Who compares and despairs? The effect of social comparison orientation on social media use and its outcomes. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2015 , 86 , 249–256. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Verduyn, P.; Gugushvili, N.; Massar, K.; Täht, K.; Kross, E. Social comparison on social networking sites. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2020 , 36 , 32–37. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Burnell, K.; George, M.J.; Vollet, J.W.; Ehrenreich, S.E.; Underwood, M.K. Passive social networking site use and well-being: The mediating roles of social comparison and the fear of missing out. Cyberpsychol. J. Psychosoc. Res. Cyberspace 2019 , 13 , 5. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, J.-L.; Wang, H.-Z.; Gaskin, J.; Hawk, S. The Mediating Roles of Upward Social Comparison and Self-esteem and the Moderating Role of Social Comparison Orientation in the Association between Social Networking Site Usage and Subjective Well-Being. Front. Psychol. 2017 , 8 , 771. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Dibb, B.; Foster, M. Loneliness and Facebook use: The role of social comparison and rumination. Heliyon 2021 , 7 , e05999. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• De Vries, D.A.; Möller, A.M.; Wieringa, M.S.; Eigenraam, A.W.; Hamelink, K. Social Comparison as the Thief of Joy: Emotional Consequences of Viewing Strangers’ Instagram Posts. Media Psychol. 2018 , 21 , 222–245. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Exelmans, L.; Van Den Bulck, J. Binge Viewing, Sleep, and the Role of Pre-Sleep Arousal. J. Clin. Sleep Med. 2017 , 13 , 1001–1008. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• SafeToNet Foundation. (n.d.). TikTok. Available online: https://safetonetfoundation.org/app-risks/tiktok/ (accessed on 27 August 2024).
• Wang, K.; Scherr, S. Dance the Night Away: How Automatic TikTok Use Creates Pre-Sleep Cognitive Arousal and Daytime Fatigue. Mob. Media Commun. 2022 , 10 , 316–336. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Harbard, E.; Allen, N.B.; Trinder, J.; Bei, B. What’s Keeping Teenagers Up? Prebedtime Behaviors and Actigraphy-Assessed Sleep Over School and Vacation. J. Adolesc. Health 2016 , 58 , 426–432. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Almeida, F.; Marques, D.R.; Gomes, A.A. A preliminary study on the association between social media at night and sleep quality: The relevance of FOMO, cognitive pre-sleep arousal, and maladaptive cognitive emotion regulation. Scand. J. Psychol. 2023 , 64 , 123–132. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Bergfeld, N.S.; Van Den Bulck, J. It’s not all about the likes: Social media affordances with nighttime, problematic, and adverse use as predictors of adolescent sleep indicators. Sleep Health 2021 , 7 , 548–555. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Faul, F.; Erdfelder, E.; Lang, A.-G.; Buchner, A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 2007 , 39 , 175–191. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chandler, J.; Rosenzweig, C.; Moss, A.J.; Robinson, J.; Litman, L. Online panels in social science research: Expanding sampling methods beyond Mechanical Turk. Behav. Res. Methods 2019 , 51 , 2022–2038. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Jenkins-Guarnieri, M.A.; Wright, S.L.; Johnson, B. Development and validation of a social media use integration scale. Psychol. Pop. Media Cult. 2013 , 2 , 38–50. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Buysse, D.J.; Reynolds, C.F.; Monk, T.H.; Berman, S.R.; Kupfer, D.J. The Pittsburgh sleep quality index: A new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry Res. 1989 , 28 , 193–213. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bastien, C.H.; Vallières, A.; Morin, C.M. Validation of the Insomnia Severity Index as an outcome measure for insomnia research. Sleep Med. 2001 , 2 , 297–307. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Samra, A.; Warburton, W.A.; Collins, A.M. Social comparisons: A potential mechanism linking problematic social media use with depression. J. Behav. Addict. 2022 , 11 , 607–614. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Nicassio, P.M.; Mendlowitz, D.R.; Fussell, J.J.; Petras, L. The phenomenology of the pre-sleep state: The development of the pre-sleep arousal scale. Behav. Res. Ther. 1985 , 23 , 263–271. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pew Research. (n.d.). Social Media Fact Sheet. Available online: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
• Saelee, R.; Haardörfer, R.; Johnson, D.A.; Gazmararian, J.A.; Suglia, S.F. Racial/Ethnic and Sex/Gender Differences in Sleep Duration Trajectories from Adolescence to Adulthood in a US National Sample. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2023 , 192 , 51–61. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hayes, A.F. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach , 2nd ed.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gonzales, A.L.; Hancock, J.T. Mirror, Mirror on my Facebook Wall: Effects of Exposure to Facebook on Self-Esteem. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2011 , 14 , 79–83. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wahl, S.; Engelhardt, M.; Schaupp, P.; Lappe, C.; Ivanov, I.V. The inner clock-Blue light sets the human rhythm. J. Biophotonics 2019 , 12 , e201900102. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hartanto, A.; Quek, F.Y.X.; Tng, G.Y.Q.; Yong, J.C. Does Social Media Use Increase Depressive Symptoms? A Reverse Causation Perspective. Front. Psychiatry 2021 , 12 , 641934. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Scott, H.; Woods, H.C. Understanding Links Between Social Media Use, Sleep and Mental Health: Recent Progress and Current Challenges. Curr. Sleep Med. Rep. 2019 , 5 , 141–149. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kardefelt-Winther, D. A conceptual and methodological critique of internet addiction research: Towards a model of compensatory internet use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014 , 31 , 351–354. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• LaRose, R.; Lin, C.A.; Eastin, M.S. Unregulated Internet Usage: Addiction, Habit, or Deficient Self-Regulation? Media Psychol. 2003 , 5 , 225–253. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Perez, E.; Donovan, E.K.; Soto, P.; Sabet, S.M.; Ravyts, S.G.; Dzierzewski, J.M. Trading likes for sleepless nights: A lifespan investigation of social media and sleep. Sleep Health 2021 , 7 , 474–477. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Kinsella, J.E.; Chin, B.N. Mechanisms Linking Social Media Use and Sleep in Emerging Adults in the United States. Behav. Sci. 2024 , 14 , 794. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14090794

Kinsella JE, Chin BN. Mechanisms Linking Social Media Use and Sleep in Emerging Adults in the United States. Behavioral Sciences . 2024; 14(9):794. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14090794

Kinsella, Joshua Ethan, and Brian N. Chin. 2024. "Mechanisms Linking Social Media Use and Sleep in Emerging Adults in the United States" Behavioral Sciences 14, no. 9: 794. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14090794

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals