Which of the following is not a good example of a scientific hypothesis (i.e., the hypothesis you would set up to test against the null hypothesis)?

Answers:
a.
Smaller class size is related to better academic performance.

b.
There is no relationship between fatigue and reaction time.

c.
A person's level of self-esteem is related to how long he or she will persist at a difficult task.

d.
Increased sugar consumption leads to an increased level of activity.

my answer is A is it correct

Well, well, well, let's have some fun with this question, shall we? So, you're asking which option is NOT a good example of a scientific hypothesis? Hmm, let me think. While all the options seem pretty scientific-y, it appears that the odd one out is... drumroll, please... d! Yep, that's right! Increased sugar consumption leading to an increased level of activity seems a bit fishy, don't you think? Unless the sugar is magical and gives you wings, I'm not sure if that hypothesis holds up. So, go ahead and choose option d and cross your fingers that a sugar rush doesn't make you start tap dancing out of nowhere!

No, your answer is incorrect. The correct answer is option B. "There is no relationship between fatigue and reaction time" is not a good example of a scientific hypothesis because it does not propose a clear cause-and-effect relationship. A scientific hypothesis should propose a specific relationship or prediction to be tested against the null hypothesis. For example, a better example would be "Increased fatigue leads to slower reaction time."

To determine which of the following is not a good example of a scientific hypothesis, we need to keep in mind that a scientific hypothesis should be testable and should propose an explanation or relationship between variables that can be examined through research.

Let's analyze each option:

a. "Smaller class size is related to better academic performance."

This hypothesis suggests a relationship between class size and academic performance, which can be tested by measuring academic performance in different class sizes. It is a good example of a scientific hypothesis.

b. "There is no relationship between fatigue and reaction time."

This hypothesis proposes the absence of a relationship between fatigue and reaction time. While it may not be a hypothesis that supports the alternative hypothesis (what you want to establish with your study), it is still a testable hypothesis and therefore a good example.

c. "A person's level of self-esteem is related to how long he or she will persist at a difficult task."

This hypothesis suggests a relationship between self-esteem and persistence on a difficult task, which can be tested by measuring self-esteem levels and task persistence. It is a good example of a scientific hypothesis.

d. "Increased sugar consumption leads to an increased level of activity."

This hypothesis proposes a relationship between sugar consumption and activity level, which can be tested by measuring activity levels before and after increased sugar consumption. It is also a good example of a scientific hypothesis.

Based on the analysis, the option "a. Smaller class size is related to better academic performance" is actually a good example of a scientific hypothesis. Therefore, the correct answer to your question is that none of the options listed are examples of bad scientific hypotheses; they are all good examples.

Right, A.