Hypothesis Testing Workflow
This skill guides you through rigorous hypothesis development and testing methodology.
Phase 1: Observation and Question
Starting Point Analysis
- What observation or phenomenon prompted this inquiry?
- What patterns or anomalies are you seeing?
- What existing knowledge is relevant?
Research Question Formulation
Good research questions are:
- Focused: Specific enough to answer
- Researchable: Can be investigated empirically
- Complex: Requires analysis, not just facts
- Arguable: Has multiple possible answers
Question Types
| Type | Example | Hypothesis Style |
|---|---|---|
| Descriptive | "What is X?" | Not hypothesis-driven |
| Relational | "Is X related to Y?" | Correlation hypothesis |
| Causal | "Does X cause Y?" | Causal hypothesis |
| Comparative | "Is X different from Y?" | Difference hypothesis |
CHECKPOINT: Confirm research question with user.
Phase 2: Hypothesis Construction
Hypothesis Components
If [independent variable/condition]
Then [dependent variable/outcome]
Because [theoretical mechanism]
Null vs Alternative Hypothesis
- H₀ (Null): No effect/relationship exists
- H₁ (Alternative): Effect/relationship exists
Example:
- H₀: Training method has no effect on performance
- H₁: Training method improves performance
Hypothesis Quality Check
- Is it testable with available methods?
- Is it falsifiable (can be proven wrong)?
- Does it make specific predictions?
- Is it parsimonious (simplest explanation)?
- Is it consistent with existing knowledge?
- Does it specify the mechanism?
Phase 3: Variable Mapping
Variable Identification
| Variable | Type | Operationalization |
|---|---|---|
| [Name] | Independent (IV) | [How measured/manipulated] |
| [Name] | Dependent (DV) | [How measured] |
| [Name] | Control | [How held constant] |
| [Name] | Confound | [Potential interference] |
| [Name] | Mediator | [Explains mechanism] |
| [Name] | Moderator | [Affects strength] |
Operationalization Criteria
For each variable:
- Concrete, observable indicators
- Reliable measurement method
- Valid representation of construct
- Appropriate scale (nominal, ordinal, interval, ratio)
Phase 4: Prediction Generation
Specific Predictions
From your hypothesis, derive:
- If H₁ true: [Specific observable outcome]
- If H₀ true: [Expected null result]
- Effect direction: [Increase/decrease/differ]
- Effect magnitude: [Expected size]
Boundary Conditions
- Under what conditions should hypothesis hold?
- Where might it not apply?
- What would moderate the effect?
CHECKPOINT: Validate predictions align with user's research goals.
Phase 5: Design Selection
Experimental vs Observational
Can you manipulate the IV?
├── Yes → Experimental design
│ ├── Random assignment possible? → True experiment
│ └── No random assignment? → Quasi-experiment
└── No → Observational design
├── Over time? → Longitudinal
└── Single point? → Cross-sectional
Design Options
| Design | Strengths | Limitations |
|---|---|---|
| RCT | Causal inference | Artificial, expensive |
| Quasi-experiment | More feasible | Weaker causal claims |
| Cohort | Temporal sequence | Attrition, time |
| Case-control | Efficient for rare outcomes | Recall bias |
| Cross-sectional | Quick, inexpensive | No causation |
Control Strategies
| Threat | Control Method |
|---|---|
| Selection bias | Random assignment, matching |
| History | Control group, isolation |
| Maturation | Control group, short duration |
| Testing effects | Control group, alternate forms |
| Instrumentation | Standardization, calibration |
Phase 6: Confound Mitigation
Confound Analysis
For each potential confound:
- How could it affect the DV?
- How might it correlate with the IV?
- What's the mitigation strategy?
Mitigation Strategies
| Strategy | How It Works |
|---|---|
| Random assignment | Distributes confounds equally |
| Matching | Pairs similar participants |
| Statistical control | Adjust in analysis |
| Counterbalancing | Vary order of conditions |
| Blinding | Remove bias from knowledge |
| Standardization | Same procedures for all |
Phase 7: Falsifiability Statement
Define Falsification Criteria
Specify exactly what results would falsify H₁:
- What outcome pattern rejects the hypothesis?
- What effect size is too small to matter?
- What statistical threshold applies?
Pre-registration Elements
- Hypothesis (before seeing data)
- Analysis plan (before seeing data)
- Sample size justification
- Exclusion criteria
- Success/failure criteria
Phase 8: Documentation
Output Structure
# Hypothesis Development: [Topic]
## Research Question
[Clearly stated question]
## Hypotheses
- H₀: [Null hypothesis]
- H₁: [Alternative hypothesis]
- Mechanism: [Why we expect this]
## Variables
| Variable | Type | Operationalization |
|----------|------|-------------------|
| [Name] | [Type] | [Definition] |
## Predictions
1. If H₁: [Expected outcome]
2. If H₀: [Expected outcome]
3. Effect size: [Expected magnitude]
## Design
- Type: [Design name]
- Justification: [Why this design]
## Confounds and Controls
| Confound | Risk | Mitigation |
|----------|------|------------|
| [Name] | [Level] | [Strategy] |
## Falsification Criteria
[Specific conditions that would reject H₁]
## Feasibility Notes
- Resources needed: [List]
- Ethical considerations: [List]
- Timeline estimate: [Estimate]