A “couple” is on the Maury Povich show, arguing about the pa…
A “couple” is on the Maury Povich show, arguing about the paternity of the woman’s new baby. The man claims he is not the father; the woman is of course claiming he is the father. Maury has the results of a paternity test in his hand. Briefly explain a type II error means in this situation, using the context of this problem. For this question, start out by assuming the man is the father because: the woman swears she hasn’t been with anybody else; the baby does kind of look like the guy; and historically, courts have been eager to have men ‘step up’ and take care of ‘their’ child. That is, the null hypothesis is that them man is the biological father of the baby. The alternative hypothesis is the man is not the biological father of the baby. I am not asking you to give the definition of a type II error. I am asking: Regarding this paternity question, if you had to explain to a person of reasonable college intelligence but who does not know statistical terms, that a type II error had been made, what would you tell them? What did the results of the paternity test make us believe about the man (did the paternity test make us believe he is biological father or not?) and what is the truth about the paternity (is he actually the biological father or not?) if we know a type 2 error was made.
Read Details