Interpret Results in Relation to Hypotheses, Objectives, and Theory

Interpreting research results is one of the most critical stages in any academic study. It’s where your data speaks, and your story takes shape. However, interpretation goes beyond stating what the results are—it involves linking findings meaningfully to your original objectives, hypotheses, and theoretical framework.

1

Restate Your Objectives and Hypotheses Clearly

2

Summarize and Explain the Key Findings Objectively

3

Connect the Results Back to Theoretical Frameworks

4

Discuss Implications in Light of Objectives and Hypotheses

5

Identify Contradictions and Explore Possible Explanations

Example:

Objective: To investigate the relationship between leadership style and employee performance.

Hypothesis: Transformational leadership positively affects employee performance.

Result: Hypothesis supported (β = 0.67, p < 0.01).

Pro Tip:

Include a brief explanation of why you formulated each hypothesis in the first place—perhaps referencing the literature or theoretical models you used. This not only adds academic depth but also connects your analysis back to your study’s foundation. You can present this recap as a concise paragraph or a visual aid like a bullet list or flowchart to keep your interpretation organized and easy to follow.

Step 1: Restate Your Objectives and Hypotheses Clearly

Before interpreting your findings, begin by clearly restating your research objectives and hypotheses. This provides essential context and ensures your discussion remains focused and logically structured. Too often, researchers jump straight into results interpretation without revisiting what they were trying to achieve in the first place.

This makes it harder for readers—and even the researcher—to assess whether the findings truly answer the research questions posed.

Start by listing the primary objectives of your research. These are the specific goals you aimed to accomplish. For each objective, restate the associated hypothesis (if applicable), and note whether it was supported or not supported based on your results.

This helps establish a framework for interpretation and guides your readers through a logical flow from research design to conclusion.

Step 2: Summarize and Explain the Key Findings Objectively

Now, present the key results of your analysis, but not just as statistics—explain what they mean in the context of your research. Go beyond "what" and start exploring the "so what?"

When summarizing, focus on:

Which variables showed significant relationships?
Were the results in line with your expectations?
Were there surprising findings?

Use plain language wherever possible. For example, instead of “The p-value was less than 0.05,” say, “The result was statistically significant, indicating a likely relationship between the two variables.”

Example:

If your correlation analysis found a positive relationship between employee engagement and job satisfaction (r = 0.72, p < 0.01), you might say, “Higher levels of engagement tend to be associated with greater job satisfaction among the respondents.”

Pro Tip:

Avoid over-interpreting non-significant results. Sometimes, lack of significance still tells an important story—perhaps about sample size, measurement tools, or hidden variables.

Example:

If your study was based on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, and you found that job security (a lower-level need) was more strongly related to performance than self-actualization, this could prompt a reevaluation of how motivational needs function in your specific context.

Pro Tip:

Use phrases like “This finding is consistent with…”, “Contrary to the expectations of [Theory Name]…”, or “This result offers partial support for…” to explicitly link your data with the theory.

Step 3: Connect the Results Back to Theoretical Frameworks

Interpretation gains academic depth when you tie results to theoretical models or conceptual lenses introduced in your literature review.

This demonstrates that you’re not just reporting data—you’re contributing to scholarly understanding.

Ask yourself:

Do the findings support the theoretical model you adopted?
Are there any inconsistencies between theory and data?
Do the results extend or refine the theory in any way?

Step 4: Discuss Implications in Light of Objectives and Hypotheses

Once you’ve presented your findings and connected them to theory, it’s time to consider the broader implications. This step requires you to evaluate how well your results fulfilled your original research objectives and whether your hypotheses were confirmed or rejected.

This is where the “so what?” question is answered—what do your findings mean in practical, theoretical, or policy-related terms?

Begin by reviewing each objective and summarizing how your results addressed it. If your hypotheses were supported, explain what that suggests about the phenomenon you studied. If they were not supported, reflect on possible reasons why—was the sample too small, the measurement imprecise, or did contextual factors play a role?

Also, discuss how these findings add to the existing body of knowledge. Are they consistent with previous studies? Do they challenge or extend current understanding? Frame this in terms of contributions to theory or suggestions for future research.

Example:

Your objective was to explore the effect of online learning satisfaction on student engagement. If your findings show a strong positive relationship, an implication might be that educational institutions should invest in improving digital infrastructure and user experience.

Pro Tip:

Avoid vague statements like “this study has implications for education.” Be specific: What should educators, policymakers, or organizations do differently based on your findings? Also, reflect on how your findings might vary in different settings or populations, which demonstrates your critical thinking and awareness of context.

Example:

If your hypothesis predicted a negative relationship between screen time and academic performance but your data showed no significant effect, you might consider whether the sample included mostly students who balance screen time responsibly.

Pro Tip:

Avoid seeing unexpected results as "failures." Instead, treat them as opportunities to refine hypotheses, adjust theoretical assumptions, or identify overlooked variables.

Step 5: Identify Contradictions and Explore Possible Explanations

Sometimes your results don’t match your expectations or prior literature—and that’s okay.

In fact, such discrepancies often open up new avenues for exploration.

Here’s how to interpret contradictory, ambiguous, or unexpected results responsibly:

Acknowledge the contradiction without dismissing it.
Offer plausible explanations: methodological, contextual, or theoretical.
Suggest how future studies could investigate the issue further.

Interpreting results isn’t just about summarizing numbers—it's about building meaning from data in relation to your objectives, hypotheses, and theoretical framework. This not only enriches your discussion chapter but also strengthens the scholarly contribution of your research.