Formulating a Hypothesis
Chapter -One
Syllabus topic 6, "Identification of Research Problem and formulation of Hypothesis."
Pages 439 to 441 of 543
In one line
Formulating a hypothesis is a drafting exercise: write it, test it against five requirements, find where it fails, and rewrite, usually three or four times.
In the wording a student can write in an exam: a hypothesis is formulated by stating the expected answer to the research question in a declarative sentence, giving each term an operational definition, specifying the population, place and period to which it applies, stating a threshold or a direction, and recording the reasons from which the expectation is derived; the draft is then tested against the requirements of clarity, specificity, testability, relation to existing knowledge and feasibility, and rewritten until it satisfies all five.
The drafting procedure
One: write the expected answer as a plain declarative sentence. Not a question and not a hope.
Two: insert the population, place and period.
Three: replace every vague term with its operational definition.
Four: add the threshold or the direction.
Five: check that something would refute it.
Six: write the derivation in a second sentence.
Seven: check feasibility. Will the instrument produce the number this sentence is about?
And eight: separate it if it contains two propositions, chapter 1130.
A worked example, three times over
Draft one: awareness of legal aid
Attempt A. People are not aware of legal aid.
Rejected because: no population, no place, no period, no threshold, and aware is undefined. Nothing would refute it.
Attempt B. Awareness of free legal services is low among residents of the study settlements.
Rejected because: low is undefined, so the study could report any figure and call it low.
Attempt C. Fewer than half of adult respondents in the three study settlements will report having heard that a lawyer can be provided free of cost by the Government.
Accepted. Population, place and period are fixed; the thing is defined by the words of question 5 of the schedule, chapter 970; the threshold is half; and a proportion of half or more refutes it.
Derivation. Expected because the entitlement in section 12 is very wide while recorded applications in the district are few, chapter 640, and because no publicity of the kind regulation 15 of the 2011 Regulations contemplates was observed in these settlements.
Draft two: the clinical papers
Attempt A. Clinical legal education is neglected in Indian law colleges.
Rejected because: it is the received account, chapter 520, it is unbounded, and neglected is a judgment rather than a measurement.
Attempt B. Most colleges do not examine the clinical papers practically.
Rejected because: most of what, where, and practically means what?
Attempt C. In a majority of the colleges affiliated to the study University, the published examination pattern for papers 21 to 24 does not provide for the practical components prescribed by Part II(B) of Schedule II of the Rules of Legal Education 2008.
Formulating a Hypothesis
Accepted. The population is the affiliated colleges, listed by the University itself; the source is the published pattern, which is a document and not an opinion; the standard is the Schedule's own text, chapter 500; and a majority providing for the components refutes it.
Derivation. Expected from the absence of any inspection of the assessment, chapter 520, and from the marking cost of thirty individually assessed exercises per student against the staffing rule 11 requires.
And notice what makes this one strong. The standard is the instrument's own, so the hypothesis cannot be accused of applying a criterion the colleges never accepted, chapter 900.
Draft three: the cost of a claim
Attempt A. Litigation is too expensive for poor people.
Rejected because: too expensive imports a standard, chapter 1050, and nothing would refute it.
Attempt B. The cost of pursuing a maintenance claim is high relative to the amount claimed.
Rejected because: high relative to is undefined and no threshold is given.
Attempt C. For claimants in the study taluk, the total cost of reaching a first effective hearing in a maintenance claim, comprising court fee, document charges, travel and wages foregone, exceeds one third of the annual maintenance claimed.
Accepted. The components are listed, so the number is constructed the same way for every respondent; the threshold is one third; and the population and place are fixed. A figure at or below one third refutes it.
Derivation. Expected from the number of journeys observed in the case study of chapter 980 and from the daily wage foregone by claimants who are daily wage earners.
And this one is chapter 910's interdisciplinary project, because the method is economic and the answer is a number no legal source contains.
The rejected drafts, and what they teach
Every attempt A above was value-laden. Not aware, neglected, too expensive. That is the natural way a lawyer states a problem, and it is why the first draft is almost always unusable.
Every attempt B was better and still unmeasurable, because a comparative word survived: low, most, high relative to.
And every attempt C did the same three things: fixed the population, place and period; replaced the comparative word with a threshold; and defined the thing by reference to something a reader could inspect, whether a question on a schedule, a printed Schedule to the Rules, or a list of cost components.
A student who applies those three moves to their own first draft will usually reach a usable hypothesis in one pass.
Formulating a Hypothesis
Writing the hypotheses into the dissertation
Where. In the methodology component MU requires, chapter 1310, and repeated at the head of the chapter that tests them.
How. Numbered, one sentence each, with the derivation immediately after.
And with a sentence saying what would refute each, which is unusual in student work and is the single clearest signal to an examiner that the writer understands what a hypothesis is.
Quick revision
Eight steps: write the expected answer as a declarative sentence; insert population, place and period; replace vague terms with operational definitions; add a threshold or direction; check that something would refute it; write the derivation; check feasibility against the instrument; and separate it if it contains two propositions.
The three moves that repair almost any first draft: fix the population, place and period; replace the comparative word with a threshold; and define the thing by reference to something a reader can inspect.
The pattern of the rejected drafts: the first is value-laden, the second retains a comparative word, and the third is usable.
In the dissertation: numbered, one sentence each, derivation immediately after, and a sentence saying what would refute each.
Test yourself
1. Set out the eight steps of formulating a hypothesis. Write the expected answer as a declarative sentence; insert the population, place and period; replace vague terms with operational definitions; add a threshold or a direction; check that something would refute it; write the derivation; check that the instrument can produce the figure the sentence is about; and separate the sentence if it contains two propositions.
2. Why is a lawyer's first draft of a hypothesis almost always unusable? Because it is value-laden. The natural way to state a legal problem is that something is inadequate, neglected or too expensive, and each of those imports a standard rather than describing a measurable state, so no observation could refute it.
3. Give the three moves that repair a draft. Fix the population, place and period; replace the comparative word such as low, most or high with a stated threshold; and define the thing being measured by reference to something a reader can inspect, such as a question on the schedule, a printed Schedule to the Rules, or a listed set of cost components.
4. Why is the hypothesis about the clinical papers particularly strong? Because its standard is the instrument's own. It measures the colleges against Part II(B) of Schedule II of the Rules of Legal Education 2008, so it cannot be answered by saying that the criterion was one the colleges never accepted.
The rest of this subject
These notes are cut from the University's printed syllabus. Open the syllabus itself, or the past papers, for the same subject.