Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Hindsight Biases

Hindsight Biases

Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Can you relate this to the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" now?

What is a Hypothesis?

What is a Hypothesis?

A hypothesis can be a simple sentence or statement about a property or any phenomenon observed or predicted for a population. It is usually a claim about a property of the population. It can be stated for any field observations or experiments. A hypothesis statement cannot be said to be right or wrong as it is merely a statement. It needs to be tested through an elaborate data collection process and an appropriate statistical test. A hypothesis should be a general but not a vague statement. It...

Decision Making: Traditional Method

Decision Making: Traditional Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...

Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?

Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?

The outcome of any hypothesis testing leads to rejecting or not rejecting the null hypothesis. This decision is taken based on the analysis of the data, an appropriate test statistic, an appropriate confidence level, the critical values, and P-values. However, when the evidence suggests that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected, is it right to say, 'Accept' the null hypothesis?
There are two ways to indicate that the null hypothesis is not rejected. 'Accept' the null hypothesis and 'fail to...

Statistical Hypothesis Testing

Statistical Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a critical statistical procedure facilitating informed, evidence-based decisions. It begins with a hypothesis, which is a tentative explanation, or a prediction about a population parameter. This hypothesis can be either a null hypothesis (H0), indicating no effect or difference, or an alternative hypothesis (Ha), suggesting an effect or difference.
Statistical significance measures the probability that an observed result occurred by chance. If this probability, known as...

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Control of Pelvic Blood Flow Using a Novel Pneumatic Abdominal Binder.

Kathmandu University medical journal (KUMJ)·2021

Same author

Motivation gains in performance groups: paradigmatic and theoretical developments on the Köhler effect.

Journal of personality and social psychology·2000

Same author

Perimortem cesarean section.

Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine·2000

Same author

Personality and social psychology review.

Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc·1997

Same author

Earnings of male and female physicians.

The New England journal of medicine·1996

Same author

Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation: jurors' bias for leniency.

Journal of personality and social psychology·1988

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 20, 2026

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Published on: January 23, 2017

HARKing: hypothesizing after the results are known.

¹Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA. kerr@pilot.msu.edu

Personality and Social Psychology Review : an Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc

|January 14, 2005

Summary

This study examines Hypothesizing After the Results are Known (HARKing), a scientific communication practice. HARKing involves presenting post hoc hypotheses as if they were predetermined, a method widely practiced yet deemed inappropriate by many scientists.

More Related Videos

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Published on: April 18, 2017

Testing for Metacognitive Responding Using an Odor-based Delayed Match-to-Sample Test in Rats

Testing for Metacognitive Responding Using an Odor-based Delayed Match-to-Sample Test in Rats

Published on: June 18, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 20, 2026

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Measuring Attention and Visual Processing Speed by Model-based Analysis of Temporal-order Judgments

Published on: January 23, 2017

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Published on: April 18, 2017

Testing for Metacognitive Responding Using an Odor-based Delayed Match-to-Sample Test in Rats

Testing for Metacognitive Responding Using an Odor-based Delayed Match-to-Sample Test in Rats

Published on: June 18, 2018

Area of Science:

Scientific communication
Research integrity
Psychology of science

Background:

Hypothesizing After the Results are Known (HARKing) is a practice where post hoc hypotheses are presented as a priori.
This practice can distort the scientific record and impact research integrity.

Purpose of the Study:

To define and identify various forms of HARKing.
To investigate the prevalence and perception of HARKing in scientific practice.
To explore the motivations behind HARKing and argue against its use.

Main Methods:

Definition and categorization of HARKing.
Presentation of survey data on the practice and perception of HARKing.
Discussion of reasons for and against HARKing.

Main Results:

Several forms of HARKing were identified.
Survey data indicate that HARKing is widely practiced and generally viewed as inappropriate.
Motivations for HARKing and arguments against its practice are discussed.

Conclusions:

HARKing is a prevalent issue in scientific communication.
The practice is widely perceived as inappropriate, suggesting a conflict between behavior and scientific norms.
Further research, open discussion, and debate are needed to address the costs and benefits of HARKing, with suggestions provided to deter the practice.