Question about wording in a grant application

[soccercat]

I'm in the process of writing student grants to help compensate for the costs of running my dissertation research and I have a question about how to word my hypotheses.

I received feedback from previous reviewers that they are not very straight forward and easy to understand (I agree but was specifically requested to write them that way by my committee members). They are also very long and take up about 1/3 of a page for 4. I could summarize them, in the process make them clearer, and thus shorten them (which is also something I'm trying to do as student grants are usually limited to very few pages and I need the space).

Do you think if I say something like "the hypotheses, in summary, are:" I'll be crossing into some kind of murky waters related ethical research issues or is it ok?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MCParent]

I don't think you should do the thing you asked about.
Hypotheses should use the variable names and describe the exact relationship posited in one sentence. e.g.,
H1: We hypothesize that scores on measure X will correlate positively and significantly with scores on measure Y.
or
H1: We hypothesize that there will be a significant indirect effect from variable X to variable Y, via variable M.
New information should never appear in hypotheses, it should all be covered in the intro and the reader should be expecting the hypotheses based on the intro.
Maybe if you're doing some very complex method, there might be some reason to make it longer, but even for something like a complex SEM you could say "we hypothesize that the direct paths indicated in figure 1 will be significant in the indicated directions."

 

[soccercat]

Right now my language reads like:

"the total scores of these specific items relating to the level of puppies' love for frolicking in fields (i.e. the items from the nature domain) from Puppy Satisfaction Questionnaire will positively covary with the total scores of these specific items related to sunshine (i.e. the items from the weather domain) as loved by humans from Sunshine Appreciation Questionnaire"

if I change it to this:

"items related to puppies' love of frolicking in fields from Puppy Satisfaction Questionnaire will positively covary from items related to human's love of sunshine from Sunshine Appreciation Questionnaire"

will that be an issue?

The comments I received generally said, "I get why you are doing your dissertation and the research makes sense, but what exactly do your hypotheses mean? Make them more concise." Since I can't do that as the proposal has already happened, I just want to clean up the language for the grants so reviewers understand them.

Edited to add:

I think the issue mainly stems from the need to decipher them to understand how they relate to the goals of the study as a whole. If possible I'd like to get to the root of each hypothesis and only keep the language needed for basic understanding.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Right now my language reads like:

"the total scores of these specific items relating to the level of puppies' love for frolicking in fields (i.e. the items from the nature domain) from Puppy Satisfaction Questionnaire will positively covary with the total scores of these specific items related to sunshine (i.e. the items from the weather domain) as loved by humans from Sunshine Appreciation Questionnaire"

if I change it to this:

"items related to puppies' love of frolicking in fields from Puppy Satisfaction Questionnaire will positively covary from items related to human's love of sunshine from Sunshine Appreciation Questionnaire"

will that be an issue?

The comments I received generally said, "I get why you are doing your dissertation and the research makes sense, but what exactly do your hypotheses mean? Make them more concise." Since I can't do that as the proposal has already happened, I just want to clean up the language for the grants so reviewers understand them.

Edited to add:

I think the issue mainly stems from the need to decipher them to understand how they relate to the goals of the study as a whole. If possible I'd like to get to the root of each hypothesis and only keep the language needed for basic understanding.

I am still confused. How are the puppies going to fill out the questionnaire?

 

[soccercat]

Paw taps! These are really smart dogs trained by the best behaviorists.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I am still confused. How are the puppies going to fill out the questionnaire?

In the cutest way possible.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Paw taps! These are really smart dogs trained by the best behaviorists.

lol I needed that laugh. Very therapeutic as I am on call this week and also got a subpoena. Stress level a little high.

 

[soccercat]

In the cutest way possible.

lol I needed that laugh. Very therapeutic as I am on call this week and also got a subpoena. Stress level a little high.

Glad to provide a funny distraction.

 

[smalltownpsych]

In the cutest way possible.

This poor puppy got tired of answering all those questions.

 

[smalltownpsych]

and as always. How do you interpret the non-responders?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Even a non-response is a response. /jedi

 

[EekVonBlergh]

I'm SO glad I randomly clicked read this thread

ETA: Good luck with the grant stuff, Soccercat, and the stress/subpoena Smalltownpsych!

 

[soccercat]

This poor puppy got tired of answering all those questions.

Study limitations: participant fatigue and a previously unforeseen confounding variable of large n with pica.

 

[soccercat]

Right now my language reads like:

"the total scores of these specific items relating to the level of puppies' love for frolicking in fields (i.e. the items from the nature domain) from Puppy Satisfaction Questionnaire will positively covary with the total scores of these specific items related to sunshine (i.e. the items from the weather domain) as loved by humans from Sunshine Appreciation Questionnaire"

if I change it to this:

"items related to puppies' love of frolicking in fields from Puppy Satisfaction Questionnaire will positively covary from items related to human's love of sunshine from Sunshine Appreciation Questionnaire"

will that be an issue?

The comments I received generally said, "I get why you are doing your dissertation and the research makes sense, but what exactly do your hypotheses mean? Make them more concise." Since I can't do that as the proposal has already happened, I just want to clean up the language for the grants so reviewers understand them.

Edited to add:

I think the issue mainly stems from the need to decipher them to understand how they relate to the goals of the study as a whole. If possible I'd like to get to the root of each hypothesis and only keep the language needed for basic understanding.

As much as I love talking about puppies and sunshine I'm still wondering if anyone has any thoughts about this, though.