I am beginning to see a lot of manuscripts submitted to my journal that have a null and alternative both stated. This seems quite silly to me as it was not what we did.
Especially in very simple hypotheses, e.g. H1: There will be a positive relationship between X and Y.
It seems like a waste of space to say H1null is "There is no relationship".
The null is what is tested, but in my estimation, it is just assumed.
Is this a new APA thing?
I do not know about APA, but this is not common in the communities that I know. However, in the past I have seen that occasionally (Ph.D.) students were doing this who just finished a course in quantitative methods ;-)
I agree with you that is information is more or less redundant in case you are applying the standard procedure (i.e., the null hypothesis assumes that there is no difference).
I was once asked by an editor to include all the null hypotheses in a manuscript I submitted, only to have the reviewers request it to be removed.
The reviewer's comment was that it was good to demonstrate that we were correctly testing the null, but that the null could be assumed and it made reading the manuscript very cumbersome.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science
- Media
- Journalism