its a important study for graduate students.

1. HYPOTHESIS

2. • A set of assumption to be proved or disproved is called hypothesis.
• Hypothesis is considered as an intelligent guess or prediction that gives
directional to the researcher to answer the research question.
• Hypothesis or hypotheses are defined as the predictive statement or explanation,
capable of being tested by scientific methods that show the relationship between
two or more independent to some dependent variables in a specified population.
• A hypothesis is an assumption about relations between variables. It is a tentative
explanation of the research problem or a guess about the research outcome.
• Webster (1968) has defined hypothesis as “a tentative assumption made in order
to draw out and test its logical or empirical consequences.” ‘Test’ here means
“either to prove it wrong or to confirm it”

3. Charecteristics of hypothesis:
• It should have elucidating power.
• It should strive to furnish an acceptable explanation
of the phenomenon.
• Must be verifiable.
• Formulated in simple, understandable terms.
• Correspond with existing knowledge.
• Testable considering the current knowledge.
• Realistic.
• Clear and unambiguous terms.
• States the expected relationship between variables.
• It should be limited in scope.

4. 1. Null hypothesis
2. Alternative hypothesis
null hypothesis
hypothesis considering no difference or the hypothesis of no difference is called
null hypothesis. Null hypothesis is reverse of research hypothesis. It is a
hypothesis of no relationship. It is denoted by (ho). Can include =, ≤ or ≥ sign in
mathematical representation. We test the null hypothesis (statement) to accept or
reject the alternative hypothesis.
Alternative hypothesis
hypothesis which is substitute of null hypothesis is called alternative hypothesis.
Alternative hypothesis is that which state opposite of the null hypothesis. It is
denoted by (ha).
Can include ≠, < or > in mathematical representation.
Null hypothesis is accepted when alternative hypothesis is rejected. Null
hypothesis is rejected when alternative hypothesis is accepted.

5. • Purpose of hypothesis
• it offers explanations for the relationships between those variables that can be
empirically tested.
• It furnishes proof that the researcher has enough background knowledge to enable
the person to make suggestions in order to extend existing knowledge.
• It gives direction to an investigation.
• It structures the next phase in the investigation and therefore furnishes continuity to
the examination of the problem.
• It is a powerful tool in research process to achieve dependable knowledge.
• It facilitates the extension of knowledge in an area.
• It enables the researcher to relate logically known facts to intelligent guesses about
unknown conditions.

6. • It provides direction to the research.
• It provides a basis to the researcher for selecting sample
and statistical techniques.
• It provides the basis for reporting the conclusions of
the study

7. • NARRATIVE LITERATURE REVIEW, ALSO REFERRED TO AS TRADITIONAL
LITERATURE REVIEW, CRITIQUES LITERATURE AND SUMMARIZES THE BODY OF A
LITERATURE. NARRATIVE REVIEW ALSO DRAWS CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE TOPIC
AND IDENTIFIES GAPS OR INCONSISTENCIES IN A BODY OF KNOWLEDGE. YOU
NEED TO HAVE A SUFFICIENTLY FOCUSED RESEARCH QUESTION TO CONDUCT A
NARRATIVE LITERATURE REVIEW
• SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW REQUIRES MORE RIGOROUS AND WELL-
DEFINED APPROACH COMPARED TO MOST OTHER TYPES OF LITERATURE
REVIEW. SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW IS COMPREHENSIVE AND DETAILS THE
TIMEFRAME WITHIN WHICH THE LITERATURE WAS SELECTED. SYSTEMATIC
LITERATURE REVIEW CAN BE DIVIDED INTO TWO CATEGORIES: META-ANALYSIS
AND META-SYNTHESIS.

8. • SCOPING LITERATURE REVIEW, AS IMPLIED BY ITS NAME IS USED TO
IDENTIFY THE SCOPE OR COVERAGE OF A BODY OF LITERATURE ON A GIVEN
TOPIC. IT HAS BEEN NOTED THAT “SCOPING REVIEWS ARE USEFUL FOR
EXAMINING EMERGING EVIDENCE WHEN IT IS STILL UNCLEAR WHAT OTHER,
MORE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS CAN BE POSED AND VALUABLY ADDRESSED BY A
MORE PRECISE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW.”[1] THE MAIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
SYSTEMATIC AND SCOPING TYPES OF LITERATURE REVIEW IS THAT, SYSTEMATIC
LITERATURE REVIEW IS CONDUCTED TO FIND ANSWER TO MORE SPECIFIC
RESEARCH QUESTIONS, WHEREAS SCOPING LITERATURE REVIEW IS CONDUCTED
TO EXPLORE MORE GENERAL RESEARCH QUESTION

9. • ARGUMENTATIVE LITERATURE REVIEW, AS THE NAME IMPLIES, EXAMINES LITERATURE
SELECTIVELY IN ORDER TO SUPPORT OR REFUTE AN ARGUMENT, DEEPLY IMBEDDED
ASSUMPTION, OR PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEM ALREADY ESTABLISHED IN THE LITERATURE. IT
SHOULD BE NOTED THAT A POTENTIAL FOR BIAS IS A MAJOR SHORTCOMING ASSOCIATED
WITH ARGUMENTATIVE LITERATURE REVIEW.
•
• INTEGRATIVE LITERATURE REVIEW REVIEWS, CRITIQUES, AND SYNTHESIZES SECONDARY DATA
ABOUT RESEARCH TOPIC IN AN INTEGRATED WAY SUCH THAT NEW FRAMEWORKS AND
PERSPECTIVES ON THE TOPIC ARE GENERATED. IF YOUR RESEARCH DOES NOT INVOLVE
PRIMARY DATA COLLECTION AND DATA ANALYSIS, THEN USING INTEGRATIVE LITERATURE
REVIEW WILL BE YOUR ONLY OPTION.

10. • THEORETICAL LITERATURE REVIEW FOCUSES ON A POOL OF THEORY THAT HAS
ACCUMULATED IN REGARD TO AN ISSUE, CONCEPT, THEORY, PHENOMENA.
THEORETICAL LITERATURE REVIEWS PLAY AN INSTRUMENTAL ROLE IN
ESTABLISHING WHAT THEORIES ALREADY EXIST, THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN
THEM, TO WHAT DEGREE EXISTING THEORIES HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED, AND
TO DEVELOP NEW HYPOTHESES TO BE TESTED