Guides scientific hypothesis development and testing methodology. Use when formulating research questions, developing testable hypotheses, designing experiments, or evaluating research approaches. Triggers on phrases like "hypothesis", "test if", "experiment design", "research question", "how would I test", "is it true that".
Guides scientific hypothesis development and testing methodology. Use when formulating research questions, developing testable hypotheses, designing experiments, or evaluating research approaches. Triggers on phrases like "hypothesis", "test if", "experiment design", "research question", "how would I test", "is it true that".
/plugin marketplace add poemswe/co-researcher/plugin install co-researcher@co-researcher-marketplaceThis skill inherits all available tools. When active, it can use any tool Claude has access to.
This skill guides you through rigorous hypothesis development and testing methodology.
Good research questions are:
| 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.
If [independent variable/condition]
Then [dependent variable/outcome]
Because [theoretical mechanism]
Example:
| 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] |
For each variable:
From your hypothesis, derive:
CHECKPOINT: Validate predictions align with user's research goals.
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 | 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 |
| 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 |
For each potential confound:
| 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 |
Specify exactly what results would falsify H₁:
# 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]