Breaking down the question

The question has two clearly signposted parts: the importance of hypothesis in social research, and the sources from which hypotheses arise. Discuss requires you to explain both with some analytical depth, not merely list points.

A hypothesis is a tentative, testable statement of the expected relationship between two or more variables. The question presupposes you can define it precisely before addressing its role and origins. Marks are lost when candidates conflate hypothesis with theory or with a research problem.

At ten marks, allocate roughly equal space to importance and sources, keeping definitions crisp and illustrations relevant. The examiner is assessing methodological literacy — whether you understand how empirical social research is actually organised.

How to approach it

Start with a tight definition, drawing on standard authorities such as Goode and Hatt, who describe a hypothesis as a proposition that can be put to test to determine its validity. Emphasise that a good hypothesis is specific, testable and states a relationship between variables.

Then treat the two parts:

  • Importance. A hypothesis gives direction and focus to research; it delimits the scope of enquiry; it guides the selection of relevant data and methods; it links theory to observation through operationalisation; and it makes findings cumulative by allowing confirmation or refutation.
  • Sources. Hypotheses may arise from existing theory through deduction; from prior empirical studies and their findings; from the researcher's personal observation, experience and intuition; from analogies with other fields; and from the surrounding culture, folk wisdom and social problems of the day.

You can note the inductive alternative — grounded theory — where hypotheses emerge from data rather than preceding it, to show awareness of debate. Conclude that hypotheses are indispensable to systematic enquiry while acknowledging exploratory research where they are provisional. For related methodological grounding, see our notes on variables, sampling, reliability and validity.

Model answer

A hypothesis is a tentative and testable statement asserting a relationship between two or more variables, framed in advance of investigation and held provisionally until evidence confirms or refutes it. Goode and Hatt describe it as a proposition that can be put to test to determine its validity. It is more specific than a theory and more precise than a research problem, and it occupies a pivotal place in the logic of social research. Its importance and its sources together explain why it is regarded as the working instrument of empirical enquiry.

The importance of a hypothesis is manifold. First, it gives direction to research: without it, an investigation risks becoming an aimless accumulation of facts. By stating what the researcher expects to find, it focuses attention on relevant phenomena and delimits the scope of study. Second, it guides methodology — the choice of data to collect, the techniques of collection and the tools of analysis all follow from the hypothesis to be tested. Third, it links theory to observation. Through operationalisation, abstract concepts are translated into measurable indicators, allowing empirical testing of theoretical claims. Fourth, it makes knowledge cumulative: because a hypothesis can be confirmed or falsified, successive studies build upon one another, and the discipline advances by the systematic elimination of error. In short, the hypothesis converts curiosity into a disciplined, verifiable enquiry.

The sources of hypothesis are equally varied. The most established source is existing theory, from which specific hypotheses are logically deduced for empirical test — Durkheim, for instance, derived testable propositions about suicide rates from his theory of social integration. A second source is prior empirical research, whose findings, gaps and anomalies suggest fresh hypotheses. A third is the personal observation, experience and intuition of the researcher, often sharpened by immersion in the field. A fourth is analogy, where relationships established in one domain are transposed to another. Finally, the general culture, folk wisdom, popular beliefs and pressing social problems of the age supply hunches that can be refined into formal hypotheses. P. V. Young and other methodologists stress this plurality of origins.

It should be acknowledged that not all research begins with a fixed hypothesis. Exploratory and inductive approaches, notably grounded theory, allow hypotheses to emerge from the data during the course of study rather than preceding it. This qualifies but does not diminish the general point: whether stated at the outset or generated through analysis, the hypothesis remains the hinge on which systematic social research turns, giving it focus, testability and cumulative power.

Examiner's perspective

Examiners expect a precise definition at the outset, ideally attributed, since candidates who blur hypothesis, theory and problem forfeit easy marks. Once the definition is secure, a balanced treatment of importance and sources in roughly equal measure answers exactly what was asked.

The strongest scripts illustrate rather than merely assert — citing Durkheim's deduction of suicide hypotheses from integration theory shows the theory-to-hypothesis link in action. Listing the sources with a concrete example for at least one lifts the answer above rote reproduction.

A common shortfall is answering only the importance and neglecting the sources, or offering an undifferentiated list with no structure. Noting the inductive alternative of grounded theory demonstrates methodological range and rounds off a ten-mark answer with the analytical awareness that the higher band rewards.