양적연구 질문과 질적연구 질문 및 가설 작성의 실용 가이드 (J Korean Med Sci. 2022)

양적연구 질문과 질적연구 질문 및 가설 작성의 실용 가이드 (J Korean Med Sci. 2022)
A Practical Guide to Writing Quantitative and Qualitative Research Questions and Hypotheses in Scholarly Articles
Edward Barroga 1 and Glafera Janet Matanguihan

 

 

서론
INTRODUCTION

과학 연구는 일반적으로 증거에 기반한 연구 질문을 제기한 다음 가설로 명시적으로 재구성하여 시작합니다.1, 2 가설은 연구를 안내하는 방향, 해결책, 설명 및 예상 결과를 제공합니다.3, 4 연구 질문과 가설은 모두 본질적으로 기존 이론과 실제 프로세스를 기반으로 공식화되어 새로운 연구를 시작하고 아이디어의 윤리적 테스트를 허용합니다.5, 6
Scientific research is usually initiated by posing evidenced-based research questions which are then explicitly restated as hypotheses.1, 2 The hypotheses provide directions to guide the study, solutions, explanations, and expected results.3, 4 Both research questions and hypotheses are essentially formulated based on conventional theories and real-world processes, which allow the inception of novel studies and the ethical testing of ideas.5, 6

양적 연구와 질적 연구 모두 연구 질문과 가설을 작성해야 하므로2 양적 연구와 질적 연구 모두에 대한 지식을 갖추는 것이 중요합니다.7 그러나 이러한 중요한 연구 요소들이 간과되는 경우가 있으며, 간과되지 않더라도 필요한 사전 고려와 세심한 주의 없이 틀을 짜는 경우가 있습니다. 정량적 또는 정성적 연구를 개발할 때, 특히 연구 질문과 가설을 개념화할 때 계획과 신중한 고려가 필요합니다.4 
It is crucial to have knowledge of both quantitative and qualitative research2 as both types of research involve writing research questions and hypotheses.7 However, these crucial elements of research are sometimes overlooked; if not overlooked, then framed without the forethought and meticulous attention it needs. Planning and careful consideration are needed when developing quantitative or qualitative research, particularly when conceptualizing research questions and hypotheses.4

연구자들이 혁신적인 연구 질문과 가설을 세우고 이러한 요소를 신중하게 검토하는 저널 논문을 작성할 수 있도록 지속적으로 지원할 필요가 있습니다.1 연구 질문과 가설을 신중하게 고려하지 않으면 일반적으로 비윤리적인 연구와 좋지 않은 결과가 이어집니다. 신중하게 수립된 연구 질문과 가설은 근거가 있는 목표를 정의하고, 이를 바탕으로 연구의 적절한 설계, 과정 및 결과를 결정합니다. 이 글에서는 연구 질문과 가설 수립의 다양한 측면을 자세히 논의하여 연구자가 연구 질문과 가설을 개발하는 데 도움을 드리고자 합니다. 의료 분야의 동료 검토를 거친 과학 논문과 저자들의 예시를 통해 핵심 사항을 설명합니다. 
There is a continuing need to support researchers in the creation of innovative research questions and hypotheses, as well as for journal articles that carefully review these elements.1 When research questions and hypotheses are not carefully thought of, unethical studies and poor outcomes usually ensue. Carefully formulated research questions and hypotheses define well-founded objectives, which in turn determine the appropriate design, course, and outcome of the study. This article then aims to discuss in detail the various aspects of crafting research questions and hypotheses, with the goal of guiding researchers as they develop their own. Examples from the authors and peer-reviewed scientific articles in the healthcare field are provided to illustrate key points.

연구 질문과 가설의 정의 및 관계
DEFINITIONS AND RELATIONSHIP OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

[연구 질문]은 [데이터 분석 및 해석을 통해 연구자가 답을 얻고자 하는 것]입니다. 이에 대한 답은 논문의 [토론 섹션]에 길게 작성됩니다. 따라서 연구 질문은 연구 질문에서 제기된 문제를 해결하기 위한 연구의 [다양한 부분parts과 변수]를 미리 볼 수 있습니다.1 [훌륭한 연구 질문]은 [연구 주제, 연구 목적, 연구 범위 및 한계에 대한 이해]를 용이하게 하면서 [연구 작성]을 명확하게 합니다.5 
A research question is what a study aims to answer after data analysis and interpretation. The answer is written in length in the discussion section of the paper. Thus, the research question gives a preview of the different parts and variables of the study meant to address the problem posed in the research question.1 An excellent research question clarifies the research writing while facilitating understanding of the research topic, objective, scope, and limitations of the study.5

반면에 [연구 가설]은 [예상되는 결과에 대한 교육적인 진술]입니다. 이 진술은 배경 연구와 현재 지식을 기반으로 합니다.8, 9 연구 가설은 새로운 현상에 대한 [구체적인 예측10] 또는 [독립 변수와 종속 변수 간의 예상 관계에 대한 공식적인 진술]입니다.3, 11 테스트하거나 탐구할 연구 질문에 대한 잠정적인 답을 제공합니다.4
On the other hand, a research hypothesis is an educated statement of an expected outcome. This statement is based on background research and current knowledge.8, 9 The research hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a new phenomenon10 or a formal statement on the expected relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable.3, 11 It provides a tentative answer to the research question to be tested or explored.4

[가설]은 [이론에 기반한 결과를 예측]하기 위해 [추론]을 사용합니다.10 가설은 아직 관찰되지 않은 이론의 구성 요소에 초점을 맞추어 이론에서 발전시킬 수도 있습니다.10 가설의 타당성은 종종 재현 가능한 실험에서 이루어진 예측의 테스트 가능성에 기반합니다.8
Hypotheses employ reasoning to predict a theory-based outcome.10 These can also be developed from theories by focusing on components of theories that have not yet been observed.10 The validity of hypotheses is often based on the testability of the prediction made in a reproducible experiment.8

반대로 [가설]을 [연구 질문]으로 바꾸어 표현할 수도 있습니다. 연구 질문에 답하기 위해서는 기존의 이론과 지식에 기반한 여러 가설이 필요할 수 있습니다. 윤리적 연구 질문과 가설을 개발하면 변수 간에 논리적 관계가 있는 연구 설계가 만들어집니다. 이러한 관계는 연구 수행을 위한 견고한 토대가 됩니다.4, 11 연구 질문이 임의로 구성되면 가설이 잘못 수립되고 연구 설계가 부적절해져 신뢰할 수 없는 결과를 초래할 수 있습니다. 따라서 연구를 시작할 때 관련 연구 질문과 검증 가능한 가설을 수립하는 것이 중요합니다.12
Conversely, hypotheses can also be rephrased as research questions. Several hypotheses based on existing theories and knowledge may be needed to answer a research question. Developing ethical research questions and hypotheses creates a research design that has logical relationships among variables. These relationships serve as a solid foundation for the conduct of the study.4, 11 Haphazardly constructed research questions can result in poorly formulated hypotheses and improper study designs, leading to unreliable results. Thus, the formulations of relevant research questions and verifiable hypotheses are crucial when beginning research.12

좋은 연구 질문과 가설의 특징
CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

우수한 연구 질문은 구체적이고 집중적입니다. 이러한 질문은 수집된 데이터와 관찰을 통합하여 후속 가설을 확인하거나 반박합니다. [잘 구성된 가설]은 [이전 보고서를 기반]으로 하며 [연구 맥락을 검증]합니다. 이러한 가설은 현실적이고, 심도 있고, 충분히 복잡하며, 재현 가능합니다. 더 중요한 것은 이러한 가설을 검증하고 테스트할 수 있다는 것입니다.13
Excellent research questions are specific and focused. These integrate collective data and observations to confirm or refute the subsequent hypotheses. Well-constructed hypotheses are based on previous reports and verify the research context. These are realistic, in-depth, sufficiently complex, and reproducible. More importantly, these hypotheses can be addressed and tested.13

잘 발달된 가설에는 몇 가지 특징이 있습니다. 좋은 가설은 

• 1) 경험적으로 테스트할 수 있고7, 10, 11, 13, 
• 2) 예비 증거에 의해 뒷받침되고9, 
• 3) 윤리적 연구에 의해 테스트할 수 있고7, 9, 
• 4) 독창적인 아이디어에 기반하고9, 
• 5) 증거에 기반한 논리적 추론이 있으며10, 
• 6) 예측할 수 있습니다.11 

좋은 가설은 연구 주제와 관련된 관계 또는 효과가 있음을 나타내는 윤리적이고 긍정적인 의미를 추론할 수 있습니다.7, 11 처음에는 일반 이론에서 개발되고 [연역적 추론]을 통해 구체적인 가설로 분기됩니다. 가설의 근거가 되는 이론이 없는 경우, [구체적인 관찰이나 발견에 근거]한 [귀납적 추론]이 보다 일반적인 가설을 형성합니다.10
There are several characteristics of well-developed hypotheses. Good hypotheses are

• 1) empirically testable7, 10, 11, 13;
• 2) backed by preliminary evidence9;
• 3) testable by ethical research7, 9;
• 4) based on original ideas9;
• 5) have evidenced-based logical reasoning10; and
• 6) can be predicted.11 

Good hypotheses can infer ethical and positive implications, indicating the presence of a relationship or effect relevant to the research theme.7, 11 These are initially developed from a general theory and branch into specific hypotheses by deductive reasoning. In the absence of a theory to base the hypotheses, inductive reasoning based on specific observations or findings form more general hypotheses.10

연구 질문 및 가설의 유형
TYPES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

연구 질문과 가설은 연구 유형에 따라 개발되며, 크게 정량적 연구와 정성적 연구로 분류할 수 있습니다. 정량적 연구와 정성적 연구 범주에 따른 연구 질문 및 가설의 유형은 표 1에 요약되어 있습니다.
Research questions and hypotheses are developed according to the type of research, which can be broadly classified into quantitative and qualitative research. We provide a summary of the types of research questions and hypotheses under quantitative and qualitative research categories in Table 1.

 

정량적 연구의 연구 질문
Research questions in quantitative research

정량적 연구에서 연구 질문은 조사 대상 변수 간의 관계를 묻는 질문으로, 일반적으로 연구를 시작할 때 구성됩니다. 이러한 질문은 정확하며 일반적으로 대상 집단, 종속 변수 및 독립 변수, 연구 설계와 관련이 있습니다.1

• 연구 질문은 하나 이상의 변수와 관련하여 모집단의 행동을 설명하거나 측정할 변수의 특성을 설명하려고 시도할 수도 있습니다(설명적 연구 질문).1, 5, 14
• 이러한 질문은 또한 결과 변수의 맥락에서 그룹 간의 차이를 발견하거나(비교 연구 질문)1, 5, 14
• 변수 간의 추세와 상호작용을 규명하는 것을 목표로 할 수도 있습니다(관계 연구 질문).1, 5

양적 연구에서 설명적, 비교 및 관계 연구 질문의 예를 표 2에 제시하고 있습니다.

In quantitative research, research questions inquire about the relationships among variables being investigated and are usually framed at the start of the study. These are precise and typically linked to the subject population, dependent and independent variables, and research design.1 Research questions may also attempt to describe the behavior of a population in relation to one or more variables, or describe the characteristics of variables to be measured (descriptive research questions).1, 5, 14 These questions may also aim to discover differences between groups within the context of an outcome variable (comparative research questions),1, 5, 14 or elucidate trends and interactions among variables (relationship research questions).1, 5 We provide examples of descriptive, comparative, and relationship research questions in quantitative research in Table 2.

정량적 연구의 가설
Hypotheses in quantitative research

정량적 연구에서 가설은 [변수 간의 예상 관계를 예측]합니다.15

• 예측할 수 있는 변수 간의 관계에는
  • 1) 단일 종속변수와 단일 독립변수 간(단순 가설) 또는
  • 2) 둘 이상의 독립변수와 종속변수 간(복합 가설)이 포함됩니다.4, 11
• 가설은
  • 또한 따라야 할 예상 방향을 명시하고 특정 결과에 대한 지적 약속을 암시할 수 있습니다(방향성 가설)4.
  • 반면에 가설은 정확한 방향을 예측하지 못할 수 있으며 이론이 없거나 이전 연구 결과와 모순되는 경우(비방향성 가설)에 사용됩니다. 4
• 또한 가설은
  • 1) 변수 간의 상호 의존성을 정의하고(연관 가설),4
  • 2) 독립 변수의 조작으로 인한 종속 변수에 대한 영향을 제안하고(인과 가설),4
  • 3) 두 변수 간의 음의 관계를 진술할 수 있습니다(귀무 가설),4, 11, 15
  • 4) 기각될 경우 작동 가설을 대체(대체 가설),15 이론을 생성할 수 있는 현상들의 관계를 설명(작동 가설),11
  • 5) 통계적으로 검증할 수 있는 정량화 가능한 변수를 포함(통계 가설),11
  • 6) 또는 상호 연관성을 논리적으로 검증할 수 있는 관계를 표현(논리적 가설)합니다. 11

In quantitative research, hypotheses predict the expected relationships among variables.15 

Relationships among variables that can be predicted include

• 1) between a single dependent variable and a single independent variable (simple hypothesis) or
• 2) between two or more independent and dependent variables (complex hypothesis).4, 11 

Hypotheses may also

• specify the expected direction to be followed and imply an intellectual commitment to a particular outcome (directional hypothesis)4.
• On the other hand, hypotheses may not predict the exact direction and are used in the absence of a theory, or when findings contradict previous studies (non-directional hypothesis).4 

In addition, hypotheses can

• 1) define interdependency between variables (associative hypothesis),4 
• 2) propose an effect on the dependent variable from manipulation of the independent variable (causal hypothesis),4 
• 3) state a negative relationship between two variables (null hypothesis),4, 11, 15 
• 4) replace the working hypothesis if rejected (alternative hypothesis),15 explain the relationship of phenomena to possibly generate a theory (working hypothesis),11 
• 5) involve quantifiable variables that can be tested statistically (statistical hypothesis),11 
• 6) or express a relationship whose interlinks can be verified logically (logical hypothesis).11 

 

정량적 연구에서 단순, 복합, 방향성, 비방향성, 연관성, 인과, 무(無), 대안, 작동, 통계적, 논리적 가설의 예와 정량적 가설 검증 연구의 정의는 표 3에 나와 있습니다.

We provide examples of simple, complex, directional, non-directional, associative, causal, null, alternative, working, statistical, and logical hypotheses in quantitative research, as well as the definition of quantitative hypothesis-testing research in Table 3.

 

질적 연구의 연구 질문
Research questions in qualitative research

양적 연구의 연구 질문과 달리 질적 연구의 연구 질문은 일반적으로 지속적으로 검토되고 재구성됩니다. 중심 질문과 관련 하위 질문은 가설보다 더 많이 명시됩니다.15 [중심 질문]은 [중심 현상]을 둘러싼 복잡한 요인들을 광범위하게 탐구하여 참여자들의 다양한 관점을 제시하는 것을 목표로 합니다.15
Unlike research questions in quantitative research, research questions in qualitative research are usually continuously reviewed and reformulated. The central question and associated subquestions are stated more than the hypotheses.15 The central question broadly explores a complex set of factors surrounding the central phenomenon, aiming to present the varied perspectives of participants.15

질적 연구 질문이 개발되는 목표는 다양합니다. 이러한 질문은 다양한 방식으로 작용할 수 있습니다. 

• 1) 기존 상황을 파악하고 설명하기 위해(맥락적 연구 질문),
• 2) 현상을 설명하기 위해(서술적 연구 질문),
• 3) 기존 방법, 프로토콜, 이론 또는 절차의 효과를 평가하기 위해(평가 연구 질문),
• 4) 현상을 조사하거나 대상 또는 현상 간의 이유 또는 관계를 분석하기 위해(설명적 연구 질문),
• 5) 특정 주제에 대해 알려지지 않은 측면에 초점을 맞추기 위해(탐색적 연구 질문) 5

There are varied goals for which qualitative research questions are developed. These questions can function in several ways, such as to

• 1) identify and describe existing conditions (contextual research questions);
• 2) describe a phenomenon (descriptive research questions);
• 3) assess the effectiveness of existing methods, protocols, theories, or procedures (evaluation research questions);
• 4) examine a phenomenon or analyze the reasons or relationships between subjects or phenomena (explanatory research questions); or
• 5) focus on unknown aspects of a particular topic (exploratory research questions).5 

또한 일부 질적 연구 질문은 이론과 행동의 발전을 위한 새로운 아이디어를 제공하거나(생성적 연구 질문) 특정 입장의 이념을 발전시키기도 합니다(이념적 연구 질문).1
In addition, some qualitative research questions provide new ideas for the development of theories and actions (generative research questions) or advance specific ideologies of a position (ideological research questions).1 

다른 질적 연구 질문은 기존 문헌을 기반으로 하여 작업 지침이 될 수도 있습니다(민족지적 연구 질문). 연구 질문은 기존 문헌이나 질문 유형에 대한 구체적인 언급 없이 광범위하게 진술될 수도 있고(현상학적 연구 질문), 어떤 과정에 대한 이론을 생성하기 위한 것일 수도 있으며(근거 이론 질문), 사례에 대한 설명과 새로운 주제(질적 사례 연구 질문)를 다룰 수도 있습니다. 15
Other qualitative research questions may build on a body of existing literature and become working guidelines (ethnographic research questions). Research questions may also be broadly stated without specific reference to the existing literature or a typology of questions (phenomenological research questions), may be directed towards generating a theory of some process (grounded theory questions), or may address a description of the case and the emerging themes (qualitative case study questions).15 

 표 4에는 질적 연구에서 맥락적, 서술적, 평가적, 설명적, 탐구적, 생성적, 이념적, 민족지학적, 현상학적, 근거 이론 및 질적 사례 연구 연구 질문의 예가 나와 있으며, 표 5에는 질적 가설 생성 연구의 정의가 나와 있습니다.
We provide examples of contextual, descriptive, evaluation, explanatory, exploratory, generative, ideological, ethnographic, phenomenological, grounded theory, and qualitative case study research questions in qualitative research in Table 4, and the definition of qualitative hypothesis-generating research in Table 5.

 

 

 

질적 연구에는 일반적으로 하나 이상의 중심 연구 질문과 '어떻게' 또는 '무엇'으로 시작하는 여러 개의 하위 질문이 있습니다. 이러한 연구 질문은 탐구하다 또는 설명하다와 같은 탐색 동사를 사용합니다. 또한 관심 있는 하나의 중심 현상에 초점을 맞추고 참여자 및 연구 사이트를 언급할 수 있습니다.15 
Qualitative studies usually pose at least one central research question and several subquestions starting with How or What. These research questions use exploratory verbs such as explore or describe. These also focus on one central phenomenon of interest, and may mention the participants and research site.15 

질적 연구의 가설
Hypotheses in qualitative research

질적 연구의 가설은 [조사하고자 하는 문제와 관련된 명확한 진술]의 형태로 진술됩니다. 일반적으로 가설을 테스트하기 위해 가설을 개발하는 양적 연구와 달리 질적 연구는 [가설 테스트와 가설 생성 결과를 모두 도출]할 수 있습니다.2 연구에 양적 연구 질문과 질적 연구 질문이 모두 필요한 경우, 이는 두 연구 방법 간의 통합 프로세스를 통해 하나의 혼합 방법 연구 질문을 개발할 수 있음을 시사합니다.1
Hypotheses in qualitative research are stated in the form of a clear statement concerning the problem to be investigated. Unlike in quantitative research where hypotheses are usually developed to be tested, qualitative research can lead to both hypothesis-testing and hypothesis-generating outcomes.2 When studies require both quantitative and qualitative research questions, this suggests an integrative process between both research methods wherein a single mixed-methods research question can be developed.1

연구 질문 및 가설 개발을 위한 프레임워크
FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

연구를 시작하기 전에 연구 질문과 가설을 개발해야 합니다.1, 12, 14 연구자와 과학계 모두에게 흥미로운 주제에 대해 실현 가능한 연구 질문을 개발하는 것이 중요합니다. 이는 이전 연구와 현재 연구를 면밀히 검토하여 새로운 주제를 설정함으로써 달성할 수 있습니다. 이후 특정 영역에 초점을 맞춰 윤리적 연구 질문을 생성합니다. 연구 질문의 관련성은 결과 데이터의 명확성, 방법론의 구체성, 결과의 객관성, 연구의 깊이, 연구의 영향력 측면에서 평가됩니다.1, 5 이러한 측면이 FINER 기준(즉, 실현 가능, 흥미, 참신, 윤리적, 관련성)을 구성합니다.1 연구 질문이 FINER 기준을 충족하면 명확성과 효과성을 확보할 수 있습니다. Ratan 등은 연구 질문의 효과성을 평가하기 위해 FINER 기준 외에도 초점, 복잡성, 참신성, 실현 가능성 및 측정 가능성을 설명했습니다.14 
Research questions followed by hypotheses should be developed before the start of the study.1, 12, 14 It is crucial to develop feasible research questions on a topic that is interesting to both the researcher and the scientific community. This can be achieved by a meticulous review of previous and current studies to establish a novel topic. Specific areas are subsequently focused on to generate ethical research questions. The relevance of the research questions is evaluated in terms of clarity of the resulting data, specificity of the methodology, objectivity of the outcome, depth of the research, and impact of the study.1, 5 These aspects constitute the FINER criteria (i.e., Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, and Relevant).1 Clarity and effectiveness are achieved if research questions meet the FINER criteria. In addition to the FINER criteria, Ratan et al. described focus, complexity, novelty, feasibility, and measurability for evaluating the effectiveness of research questions.14

연구 질문을 개발할 때 PICOT 및 PEO 프레임워크도 사용됩니다.1 이러한 프레임워크에서 다루는 요소는 다음과 같습니다

• PICOT: P-인구/환자/문제, I-연구 중인 중재 또는 지표, C-비교군, O-관심 결과, T-연구 기간;
• PEO: P-연구 대상 인구, E-기존 질환에 대한 노출, O-관심 결과.1
• 연구 질문도 "정밀지도" 프레임워크에 부합하면 좋은 것으로 간주됩니다: 실현 가능, 흥미로움, 참신함, 윤리적, 관련성, 관리 가능, 적절함, 잠재적 가치/출판 가능, 체계적.14

The PICOT and PEO frameworks are also used when developing research questions.1 The following elements are addressed in these frameworks,

• PICOT: P-population/patients/problem, I-intervention or indicator being studied, C-comparison group, O-outcome of interest, and T-timeframe of the study;
• PEO: P-population being studied, E-exposure to preexisting conditions, and O-outcome of interest.1 
• Research questions are also considered good if these meet the “FINERMAPS” framework: Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical, Relevant, Manageable, Appropriate, Potential value/publishable, and Systematic.14

앞서 언급했듯이, 연구 질문과 가설을 신중하게 수립하지 않으면 비윤리적인 연구나 좋지 않은 결과를 초래할 수 있습니다. 이를 설명하기 위해 양적 연구(표 6)16 및 질적 연구(표 7)17에서 불명확하고 취약한 연구 목표를 초래하는 모호한 연구 질문 및 가설의 몇 가지 예와 이러한 모호한 연구 질문 및 가설을 명확하고 좋은 진술로 전환하는 방법을 제공합니다. 
As we indicated earlier, research questions and hypotheses that are not carefully formulated result in unethical studies or poor outcomes. To illustrate this, we provide some examples of ambiguous research question and hypotheses that result in unclear and weak research objectives in quantitative research (Table 6)16 and qualitative research (Table 7)17, and how to transform these ambiguous research question(s) and hypothesis(es) into clear and good statements.

 

연구 질문 및 가설 구성
CONSTRUCTING RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES

효과적인 연구 질문과 가설을 구성하기 위해서는

• 1) 연구 배경을 명확히 하고
• 2) 연구 시작 시 특정 기간 내에 연구 문제를 파악하는 것이 매우 중요합니다.9 그런 다음
• 3) 이론과 선행 연구를 검토하거나 예비 연구를 수행하여 가능한 연구 질문에 대한 모든 지식을 수집합니다.18 그 후
• 4) 연구 문제를 조사하기 위한 연구 질문을 구성합니다. 연구 질문에서 접근해야 할 변수를 식별하고4 연구 문제와 질문에서 구성 요소에 대한 조작적 정의를 내립니다. 그 후,
• 5) 가설의 형태로 구체적인 연역적 또는 귀납적 예측을 구성합니다.4 마지막으로,
• 6) 연구 목표를 명시합니다.

연구를 수행하기 전에 효과적인 연구 질문과 가설을 구성하기 위한 일반적인 흐름은 그림 1에 나와 있습니다.

To construct effective research questions and hypotheses, it is very important to

1) clarify the background and
2) identify the research problem at the outset of the research, within a specific timeframe.9 Then,
3) review or conduct preliminary research to collect all available knowledge about the possible research questions by studying theories and previous studies.18 Afterwards,
4) construct research questions to investigate the research problem. Identify variables to be accessed from the research questions4 and make operational definitions of constructs from the research problem and questions. Thereafter,
5) construct specific deductive or inductive predictions in the form of hypotheses.4 Finally,
6) state the study aims.

This general flow for constructing effective research questions and hypotheses prior to conducting research is shown in Fig. 1.

질적 연구에서 [연구 질문]은 목적이나 가설보다 더 자주 사용됩니다.3 이러한 질문은 "무엇을" 또는 "어떻게"라고 질문하여 경험을 발견, 이해, 탐구 또는 설명하고자 합니다. 이러한 질문은 변수를 연관시키거나 그룹을 비교하기보다는 설명을 이끌어내기 위한 개방형 질문입니다. 질적 연구를 진행하는 동안 질문은 지속적으로 검토, 재구성 및 변경됩니다.3 또한 연구 질문은 변수와 그 관계를 비교하기 위한 정량적 연구의 실험에서 가설보다 설문조사 프로젝트에서 더 자주 사용됩니다.
Research questions are used more frequently in qualitative research than objectives or hypotheses.3 These questions seek to discover, understand, explore or describe experiences by asking “What” or “How.” The questions are open-ended to elicit a description rather than to relate variables or compare groups. The questions are continually reviewed, reformulated, and changed during the qualitative study.3 Research questions are also used more frequently in survey projects than hypotheses in experiments in quantitative research to compare variables and their relationships.

[가설]은 확인된 변수를 바탕으로 '특정 행동을 취하면 특정 결과가 예상된다'는 템플릿에 따라 if-then 문장으로 구성됩니다. 이 단계에서는 수행하고자 하는 연구를 통해 기대되는 결과에 대한 아이디어를 도출해야 합니다.18 그런 다음 조작할 변수(독립변수)와 영향을 받을 변수(종속변수)를 정의합니다.4 그 후 가설을 진술하고 구체화하며 가설에 맞는 재현 가능한 데이터를 식별, 수집, 분석합니다.4 가설은 테스트 가능하고 구체적이어야 하며,18 변수와 변수 간의 관계, 연구 대상 특정 집단, 예측되는 연구 결과를 기술해야 합니다.18 가설 구성에는 이론으로부터 추론할 수 있는 테스트 가능한 명제와 독립변수와 종속변수가 분리되어 별도로 측정되어야 합니다.3 따라서 좋은 가설은 연구 또는 시험을 시작할 때 구성한 좋은 연구 질문에 기반해야 합니다.12
Hypotheses are constructed based on the variables identified and as an if-then statement, following the template, ‘If a specific action is taken, then a certain outcome is expected.’ At this stage, some ideas regarding expectations from the research to be conducted must be drawn.18 Then, the variables to be manipulated (independent) and influenced (dependent) are defined.4 Thereafter, the hypothesis is stated and refined, and reproducible data tailored to the hypothesis are identified, collected, and analyzed.4 The hypotheses must be testable and specific,18 and should describe the variables and their relationships, the specific group being studied, and the predicted research outcome.18 Hypotheses construction involves a testable proposition to be deduced from theory, and independent and dependent variables to be separated and measured separately.3 Therefore, good hypotheses must be based on good research questions constructed at the start of a study or trial.12

요약하면, [연구 질문]은 [연구의 배경]을 설정한 후 구성됩니다. 그런 다음 [연구 질문]에 따라 [가설을 개발]합니다. 따라서 우수한 가설을 도출하기 위해서는 우수한 연구 질문을 갖는 것이 중요합니다. 연구 질문에 따라 연구 목표와 연구 설계가 결정되고 궁극적으로 연구 결과가 결정됩니다.12 연구 질문과 가설을 구축하는 알고리즘은 정량적 연구의 경우 그림 2에, 질적 연구의 경우 그림 3에 나와 있습니다.
In summary, research questions are constructed after establishing the background of the study. Hypotheses are then developed based on the research questions. Thus, it is crucial to have excellent research questions to generate superior hypotheses. In turn, these would determine the research objectives and the design of the study, and ultimately, the outcome of the research.12 Algorithms for building research questions and hypotheses are shown in Fig. 2 for quantitative research and in Fig. 3 for qualitative research.

 

 

 

결론
CONCLUSION

연구 질문과 가설은 정량적이든 정성적이든 모든 유형의 연구에서 중요한 요소입니다. 이러한 질문은 연구를 시작할 때 개발해야 합니다. 훌륭한 연구 질문은 나침반처럼 연구의 방향을 설정하고 연구의 성공적인 수행을 결정할 수 있는 훌륭한 가설로 이어집니다. 많은 연구가 실패한 이유는 연구 질문과 그에 따른 가설을 개발하는 데 충분한 고민과 세심한 주의를 기울이지 않았기 때문입니다. 연구 질문과 가설의 개발은 문헌에 대한 광범위한 지식과 지식 격차에 대한 통찰력 있는 파악을 바탕으로 반복적인 과정을 거쳐야 합니다. 집중적이고 간결하며 구체적인 연구 질문은 연구 결과에 대한 공식적인 예측 역할을 하는 가설을 구성하는 데 강력한 토대를 제공합니다. 연구 질문과 가설은 간과해서는 안 되는 연구의 중요한 요소입니다. 연구를 계획할 때 신중하게 생각하고 가설을 세워야 합니다. 이는 연구의 설계, 과정 및 결과를 결정하는 근거 있는 목표를 정의함으로써 비윤리적인 연구와 부실한 결과를 방지합니다.
Research questions and hypotheses are crucial components to any type of research, whether quantitative or qualitative. These questions should be developed at the very beginning of the study. Excellent research questions lead to superior hypotheses, which, like a compass, set the direction of research, and can often determine the successful conduct of the study. Many research studies have floundered because the development of research questions and subsequent hypotheses was not given the thought and meticulous attention needed. The development of research questions and hypotheses is an iterative process based on extensive knowledge of the literature and insightful grasp of the knowledge gap. Focused, concise, and specific research questions provide a strong foundation for constructing hypotheses which serve as formal predictions about the research outcomes. Research questions and hypotheses are crucial elements of research that should not be overlooked. They should be carefully thought of and constructed when planning research. This avoids unethical studies and poor outcomes by defining well-founded objectives that determine the design, course, and outcome of the study.

 

 

EXAMPLES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS FROM PUBLISHED ARTICLES

 

• EXAMPLE 1. Descriptive research question (quantitative research)
• - Presents research variables to be assessed (distinct phenotypes and subphenotypes)
• “BACKGROUND: Since COVID-19 was identified, its clinical and biological heterogeneity has been recognized. Identifying COVID-19 phenotypes might help guide basic, clinical, and translational research efforts.
• RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the clinical spectrum of patients with COVID-19 contain distinct phenotypes and subphenotypes?”19

 

• EXAMPLE 2. Relationship research question (quantitative research)
• - Shows interactions between dependent variable (static postural control) and independent variable (peripheral visual field loss)
• “Background: Integration of visual, vestibular, and proprioceptive sensations contributes to postural control. People with peripheral visual field loss have serious postural instability. However, the directional specificity of postural stability and sensory reweighting caused by gradual peripheral visual field loss remain unclear.
• Research question: What are the effects of peripheral visual field loss on static postural control?”20

 

• EXAMPLE 3. Comparative research question (quantitative research)
• - Clarifies the difference among groups with an outcome variable (patients enrolled in COMPERA with moderate PH or severe PH in COPD) and another group without the outcome variable (patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH))
• “BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) in COPD is a poorly investigated clinical condition.
• RESEARCH QUESTION: Which factors determine the outcome of PH in COPD?
• STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed the characteristics and outcome of patients enrolled in the Comparative, Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary Hypertension (COMPERA) with moderate or severe PH in COPD as defined during the 6th PH World Symposium who received medical therapy for PH and compared them with patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH).”21

• EXAMPLE 4. Exploratory research question (qualitative research)
• - Explores areas that have not been fully investigated (perspectives of families and children who receive care in clinic-based child obesity treatment) to have a deeper understanding of the research problem
• “Problem: Interventions for children with obesity lead to only modest improvements in BMI and long-term outcomes, and data are limited on the perspectives of families of children with obesity in clinic-based treatment. This scoping review seeks to answer the question: What is known about the perspectives of families and children who receive care in clinic-based child obesity treatment? This review aims to explore the scope of perspectives reported by families of children with obesity who have received individualized outpatient clinic-based obesity treatment.”22

• EXAMPLE 5. Relationship research question (quantitative research)
• - Defines interactions between dependent variable (use of ankle strategies) and independent variable (changes in muscle tone)
• “Background: To maintain an upright standing posture against external disturbances, the human body mainly employs two types of postural control strategies: “ankle strategy” and “hip strategy.” While it has been reported that the magnitude of the disturbance alters the use of postural control strategies, it has not been elucidated how the level of muscle tone, one of the crucial parameters of bodily function, determines the use of each strategy. We have previously confirmed using forward dynamics simulations of human musculoskeletal models that an increased muscle tone promotes the use of ankle strategies. The objective of the present study was to experimentally evaluate a hypothesis: an increased muscle tone promotes the use of ankle strategies. Research question: Do changes in the muscle tone affect the use of ankle strategies?”23

 

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESES IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES

• EXAMPLE 1. Working hypothesis (quantitative research)
• - A hypothesis that is initially accepted for further research to produce a feasible theory
• “As fever may have benefit in shortening the duration of viral illness, it is plausible to hypothesize that the antipyretic efficacy of ibuprofen may be hindering the benefits of a fever response when taken during the early stages of COVID-19 illness.”24
• “In conclusion, it is plausible to hypothesize that the antipyretic efficacy of ibuprofen may be hindering the benefits of a fever response. The difference in perceived safety of these agents in COVID-19 illness could be related to the more potent efficacy to reduce fever with ibuprofen compared to acetaminophen. Compelling data on the benefit of fever warrant further research and review to determine when to treat or withhold ibuprofen for early stage fever for COVID-19 and other related viral illnesses.”24

• EXAMPLE 2. Exploratory hypothesis (qualitative research)
• - Explores particular areas deeper to clarify subjective experience and develop a formal hypothesis potentially testable in a future quantitative approach
• “We hypothesized that when thinking about a past experience of help-seeking, a self distancing prompt would cause increased help-seeking intentions and more favorable help-seeking outcome expectations.”25
• “Conclusion
• Although a priori hypotheses were not supported, further research is warranted as results indicate the potential for using self-distancing approaches to increasing help-seeking among some people with depressive symptomatology.”25

• EXAMPLE 3. Hypothesis-generating research to establish a framework for hypothesis testing (qualitative research)
• “We hypothesize that compassionate care is beneficial for patients (better outcomes), healthcare systems and payers (lower costs), and healthcare providers (lower burnout).”26
• “Conclusion
• Compassionomics is the branch of knowledge and scientific study of the effects of compassionate healthcare. Our main hypotheses are that compassionate healthcare is beneficial for (1) patients, by improving clinical outcomes, (2) healthcare systems and payers, by supporting financial sustainability, and (3) HCPs, by lowering burnout and promoting resilience and well-being. The purpose of this paper is to establish a scientific framework for testing the hypotheses above. If these hypotheses are confirmed through rigorous research, compassionomics will belong in the science of evidence-based medicine, with major implications for all healthcare domains.”26

• EXAMPLE 4. Statistical hypothesis (quantitative research)
• - An assumption is made about the relationship among several population characteristics (gender differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with ADHD). Validity is tested by statistical experiment or analysis (chi-square test, Students t-test, and logistic regression analysis)
• “Our research investigated gender differences in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of adults with ADHD in a Japanese clinical sample. Due to unique Japanese cultural ideals and expectations of women's behavior that are in opposition to ADHD symptoms, we hypothesized that women with ADHD experience more difficulties and present more dysfunctions than men. We tested the following hypotheses: first, women with ADHD have more comorbidities than men with ADHD; second, women with ADHD experience more social hardships than men, such as having less full-time employment and being more likely to be divorced.”27
• “Statistical Analysis
• (text omitted) Between-gender comparisons were made using the chi-squared test for categorical variables and Students t-test for continuous variables…(text omitted). A logistic regression analysis was performed for employment status, marital status, and comorbidity to evaluate the independent effects of gender on these dependent variables.”27

 

EXAMPLES OF HYPOTHESIS AS WRITTEN IN PUBLISHED ARTICLES IN RELATION TO OTHER PARTS

• EXAMPLE 1. Background, hypotheses, and aims are provided
• BACKGROUND
• “Pregnant women need skilled care during pregnancy and childbirth, but that skilled care is often delayed in some countries …(text omitted). The focused antenatal care (FANC) model of WHO recommends that nurses provide information or counseling to all pregnant women …(text omitted). Job aids are visual support materials that provide the right kind of information using graphics and words in a simple and yet effective manner. When nurses are not highly trained or have many work details to attend to, these job aids can serve as a content reminder for the nurses and can be used for educating their patients (Jennings, Yebadokpo, Affo, & Agbogbe, 2010) (text omitted). Importantly, additional evidence is needed to confirm how job aids can further improve the quality of ANC counseling by health workers in maternal care …(text omitted)”28
• HYPOTHESES
• “This has led us to hypothesize that the quality of ANC counseling would be better if supported by job aids. Consequently, a better quality of ANC counseling is expected to produce higher levels of awareness concerning the danger signs of pregnancy and a more favorable impression of the caring behavior of nurses.”28
• AIMS
• “This study aimed to examine the differences in the responses of pregnant women to a job aid-supported intervention during ANC visit in terms of 1) their understanding of the danger signs of pregnancy and 2) their impression of the caring behaviors of nurses to pregnant women in rural Tanzania.”28

 

• EXAMPLE 2. Background, hypotheses, and aims are provided
• BACKGROUND
• “We conducted a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate and compare changes in salivary cortisol and oxytocin levels of first-time pregnant women between experimental and control groups. The women in the experimental group touched and held an infant for 30 min (experimental intervention protocol), whereas those in the control group watched a DVD movie of an infant (control intervention protocol). The primary outcome was salivary cortisol level and the secondary outcome was salivary oxytocin level.”29
• HYPOTHESIS
• “We hypothesize that at 30 min after touching and holding an infant, the salivary cortisol level will significantly decrease and the salivary oxytocin level will increase in the experimental group compared with the control group.”29

• EXAMPLE 3. Background, aim, and hypothesis are provided
• BACKGROUND
• “In countries where the maternal mortality ratio remains high, antenatal education to increase Birth Preparedness and Complication Readiness (BPCR) is considered one of the top priorities [1]. BPCR includes birth plans during the antenatal period, such as the birthplace, birth attendant, transportation, health facility for complications, expenses, and birth materials, as well as family coordination to achieve such birth plans. In Tanzania, although increasing, only about half of all pregnant women attend an antenatal clinic more than four times [4]. Moreover, the information provided during antenatal care (ANC) is insufficient. In the resource-poor settings, antenatal group education is a potential approach because of the limited time for individual counseling at antenatal clinics.”30
• AIM
• “This study aimed to evaluate an antenatal group education program among pregnant women and their families with respect to birth-preparedness and maternal and infant outcomes in rural villages of Tanzania.”30
• HYPOTHESIS
• “The study hypothesis was if Tanzanian pregnant women and their families received a family-oriented antenatal group education, they would (1) have a higher level of BPCR, (2) attend antenatal clinic four or more times, (3) give birth in a health facility, (4) have less complications of women at birth, and (5) have less complications and deaths of infants than those who did not receive the education.”30

 

---

 

 

J Korean Med Sci. 2022 Apr 25;37(16):e121. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2022.37.e121.

 

A Practical Guide to Writing Quantitative and Qualitative Research Questions and Hypotheses in Scholarly Articles

Edward Barroga 1, Glafera Janet Matanguihan 2

Affiliations collapse

1Department of General Education, Graduate School of Nursing Science, St. Luke's International University, Tokyo, Japan. edward-barroga@slcn.ac.jp.

2Department of Biological Sciences, Messiah University, Mechanicsburg, PA, USA.

PMID: 35470596

PMCID: PMC9039193

DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2022.37.e121

 

Abstract

The development of research questions and the subsequent hypotheses are prerequisites to defining the main research purpose and specific objectives of a study. Consequently, these objectives determine the study design and research outcome. The development of research questions is a process based on knowledge of current trends, cutting-edge studies, and technological advances in the research field. Excellent research questions are focused and require a comprehensive literature search and in-depth understanding of the problem being investigated. Initially, research questions may be written as descriptive questions which could be developed into inferential questions. These questions must be specific and concise to provide a clear foundation for developing hypotheses. Hypotheses are more formal predictions about the research outcomes. These specify the possible results that may or may not be expected regarding the relationship between groups. Thus, research questions and hypotheses clarify the main purpose and specific objectives of the study, which in turn dictate the design of the study, its direction, and outcome. Studies developed from good research questions and hypotheses will have trustworthy outcomes with wide-ranging social and health implications.

Keywords: Hypotheses; Qualitative Research; Quantitative Research; Research Questions.

© 2022 The Korean Academy of Medical Sciences.