Here’s a detailed explanation of Working Hypothesis in General and Legal Research
Methodology:
Working Hypothesis
1. Meaning
A working hypothesis is a tentative assumption or proposition made by a researcher to guide
the investigation. It is not the final conclusion but a starting point that helps in collecting,
analyzing, and interpreting data.
In general research, it is a logical guess or assumption about the
relationship between variables.
In legal research, it is a tentative assumption about the meaning,
application, or impact of a law, judicial interpretation, or legal principle.
2. Nature of a Working Hypothesis
1. Tentative in character – it is subject to modification as research
progresses.
2. Testable and verifiable – should be capable of being proved true or
false through evidence.
3. Guiding role – helps in narrowing down the research problem.
4. Based on prior knowledge – emerges from existing literature and
observations.
3. Functions of Working Hypothesis
1. Directs the Research
o Provides a framework for data collection and analysis.
o Example (General): “Higher education improves employment
opportunities in rural areas.”
o Example (Legal): “The right to privacy as recognized in
Puttaswamy v. Union of India will significantly restrict
government surveillance powers.”
2. Clarifies the Problem
o Prevents vagueness and ensures the research problem is
specific.
o Example (Legal): Instead of “rape laws in India,” the hypothesis
could specify: “Exclusion of marital rape from Section 375 IPC
violates Article 14.”
3. Suggests Data Requirements
o Determines what kind of information is needed.
o Example: If the hypothesis is about police brutality, the
researcher will collect FIRs, NHRC reports, and case law.
4. Provides a Basis for Analysis
o Enables comparison between expected and actual findings.
4. Sources of Working Hypothesis
1. General Experience and Observations
o Day-to-day experiences inspire hypotheses.
o Example (Legal): Observation that undertrials languish in jails →
hypothesis: “Delay in justice delivery leads to violation of Article
21 rights.”
2. Review of Literature
o Previous studies highlight gaps that form the basis of
hypotheses.
3. Theories and Models
o Existing theories help frame tentative assumptions.
o Example (General): Hypothesis based on Marxist theory about
labor exploitation.
o Example (Legal): Hypothesis about judicial activism shaping
constitutional law.
4. Personal Insights or Intuition
o Sometimes, the researcher’s insights form the starting point.
5. Types of Working Hypothesis
1. Descriptive Hypothesis – describes characteristics of a phenomenon.
o Example (General): “Urban slums lack adequate healthcare
facilities.”
o Example (Legal): “Most victims of custodial violence belong to
marginalized communities.”
2. Relational Hypothesis – shows relationship between variables.
o Example (General): “Higher education reduces unemployment.”
o Example (Legal): “Judicial independence is directly related to
protection of fundamental rights.”
3. Causal Hypothesis – assumes one variable causes another.
o Example (General): “Exposure to social media increases political
awareness.”
o Example (Legal): “Delay in execution of death penalty causes
mental torture, violating Article 21.”
6. Role in Legal Research
Guides Doctrinal Research: Helps in framing assumptions about
interpretation of statutes.
Guides Empirical Legal Studies: Hypotheses about how laws
function in society.
Examples:
o “Criminalization of triple talaq improves Muslim women’s access
to justice.”
o “Recognition of LGBTQ+ rights post-Navtej Johar reduces
discrimination in workplaces.”
o “PILs are more effective in environmental protection than
statutory remedies under the Environment Act.”
7. Limitations of Working Hypothesis
1. Not always possible in exploratory research – sometimes the
problem is too vague.
2. Risk of bias – researcher may force data to fit the hypothesis.
3. May become outdated – especially in law, where statutes and
judgments change rapidly.
8. Conclusion
A working hypothesis is a crucial research tool that provides direction, focus, and purpose to
both general and legal research. While tentative, it serves as the foundation for testing ideas,
collecting relevant data, and reaching valid conclusions. In legal studies, it bridges the gap
between law in books and law in action, ensuring that the research remains structured and
purposeful.
