Structured hypothesis generation workflow. Use when: user needs to formulate testable scientific hypotheses from observations, gaps, or preliminary data. NOT for: testing hypotheses or running experiments.
Structured workflow for generating testable scientific hypotheses.
Identify the phenomenon, anomaly, or gap:
Ground in existing literature:
State the hypothesis formally:
Template: "If [independent variable/condition], then [predicted effect on dependent variable], because [proposed mechanism]."
Null Hypothesis (H0): No effect / no difference / no relationship Alternative Hypothesis (H1): The predicted effect exists Directional: Specify direction (increase/decrease) when justified
Score each hypothesis on:
| Criterion | Score (1-5) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Testability | _ | Can be experimentally tested? |
| Falsifiability | _ | Can be proven wrong? |
| Novelty | _ | How new is this idea? |
| Mechanism | _ | Is the proposed mechanism plausible? |
| Feasibility | _ | Can current methods test it? |
| Impact | _ | How significant if confirmed? |
Rank hypotheses by:
## Hypothesis [N]: [Short title]
**Statement**: If [condition], then [prediction], because [mechanism].
**H0**: [Null hypothesis]
**H1**: [Alternative hypothesis]
**Variables**:
- Independent: [variable]
- Dependent: [variable]
- Controls: [variables to hold constant]
**Evaluation**: Testability=[X] Falsifiability=[X] Novelty=[X] Mechanism=[X] Feasibility=[X] Impact=[X]
**Priority Score**: [Total/30]
**Key References**: [relevant citations]
**Suggested Test**: [brief experimental approach]