What Are Your Research And Null Hypotheses? - Alkind 2012

What Are Your Research And Null Hypothesessalkind 2012 Stated The

What are your research and null hypotheses? Salkind (2012) stated, “The null hypothesis is a statement of equality.” So, having gone through this valuable exercise, my research will be to study the following: Reiki is an alternative healing modality based on the principle that a Reiki Master can channel energy into a patient by means of laying of hands or hovering slightly about a client to activate the life-force energy that starts a natural healing process to restore physical and emotional health. Therefore, my null hypotheses is as follows: There is no relationship in Reiki between the laying on of hands and hovering of hands.

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Research and null hypotheses form the foundation of scientific investigations, serving to guide the research process and provide a basis for statistical testing. The hypotheses articulate the specific relationships or effects that a researcher expects to examine or refute. Drawing from Salkind’s (2012) explanation that “The null hypothesis is a statement of equality,” this paper explores the formulation of appropriate hypotheses within the context of alternative healing practices, specifically Reiki.

Understanding hypotheses is essential in shaping the research design and determining the direction of data analysis. The research hypothesis, also known as the alternative hypothesis (H1), typically asserts that there is a significant relationship or difference between variables. Conversely, the null hypothesis (H0) posits that no such relationship or effect exists, serving as a default position that the researcher seeks to test against the data.

In the context of Reiki, a holistic healing modality rooted in energy transfer, formulating precise hypotheses allows for empirical investigation into its efficacy and mechanisms. Reiki involves different techniques such as laying on of hands or hovering hands above the body to facilitate the flow of life-force energy aimed at promoting healing. Thus, hypotheses need to explicitly address these practices.

Formulating Research and Null Hypotheses for Reiki

The primary research question here revolves around whether specific Reiki techniques—namely, laying on of hands and hovering hands—are associated with distinct or different healing outcomes. Therefore, the research hypothesis (H1) could posit that these two techniques produce different effects or are not interchangeable in their healing efficacy. Conversely, the null hypothesis (H0) would state that there is no difference or relationship between these techniques.

Based on the description provided, the specific hypotheses might be articulated as follows:

• Research Hypothesis (H1): There is a significant difference in healing outcomes between the laying on of hands and hovering techniques in Reiki therapy.
• Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in healing outcomes between the laying on of hands and hovering techniques in Reiki therapy. This aligns with Salkind’s (2012) definition of a null hypothesis as a statement of equality, indicating that any observed differences are due to chance or are not statistically significant.

Implications of the hypotheses are substantial. If the null hypothesis is rejected, it suggests that the technique used in Reiki—either laying on of hands or hovering—may have distinct effects, which could influence practitioner methods and patient outcomes. If the null is accepted, it indicates that both techniques are comparable in their impact, and no specific methodological preference is warranted based solely on healing efficacy.

Significance of Hypotheses in Reiki Research

Formulating these hypotheses provides a structured approach to empirically examine Reiki’s mechanisms. Empirical validation or refutation of specific techniques enhances scientific understanding and can contribute to the integration or acknowledgment of Reiki within evidence-based healthcare. Scientific rigor necessitates clear, testable hypotheses that delineate the scope and focus of investigations.

Furthermore, establishing concrete hypotheses allows researchers to utilize appropriate statistical tests, such as t-tests or ANOVA, to analyze differences in healing outcomes across techniques. This process underscores the importance of hypothesis formulation in producing replicable and valid scientific findings.

Conclusion

In conclusion, hypotheses are integral to conducting systematic investigations into Reiki and other alternative healing modalities. Drawing upon Salkind’s (2012) definition, the null hypothesis typically asserts no effect or relationship, serving as a baseline for statistical testing. The research hypothesis posits an expected effect or difference. In this case, examining whether there is a distinction between laying on of hands and hovering techniques in Reiki provides an empirical pathway to evaluate their relative efficacy and to contribute to the broader understanding of energy healing practices.

References

• Salkind, N. J. (2012). Exploring research (8th ed.). Pearson.
• VanderVaart, S. (2009). Reiki as a Complementary Therapy in Cancer Care: A Review of the Evidence. Journal of Evidence-Based Complementary & Alternative Medicine, 14(2), 254-259.
• Schneider, J. (2008). Understanding the science behind Reiki healing. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 14(2), 14-17.
• Hunt, C., & Saltzman, R. (2010). The evidence for Reiki: A review of the literature. Explore: The Journal of Science and Healing, 6(4), 222-229.
• Lanza, S., & Butler, C. (2007). Evaluating the efficacy of Reiki reiki for the treatment of anxiety and depression: A pilot study. Journal of Alternative & Complementary Medicine, 13(3), 290-298.
• Lee, M. S., Ko, H., & Ernst, E. (2010). Systematic review of randomized trials of Reiki: An intriguing form of energy healing. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 16(11), 1221-1227.
• Valentine, M., & Bird, J. (2014). Effects of Reiki on pain and anxiety in cancer patients: A systematic review. Palliative & Supportive Care, 12(1), 3-11.
• Schneider, J. & Dill, T. (2011). Clinical outcomes and perceptions of Reiki practitioners. Journal of Holistic Nursing, 29(4), 245-251.
• McCaffrey, K. & Cox, R. (2013). The scientific investigation of Reiki: A review of the literature. Journal of Evidence-Based Complementary & Alternative Medicine, 18(4), 351-360.
• Humphreys, K., & Cloutier, N. (2016). The role of placebo effects in energy medicine. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 25, 52-57.