Question

Rosenhan (1973) makes a number of striking claims about the way that "mental patients" are treated in his article "On being sane in insane places." Rosenhan states that "the normal are not detectably sane" and psychiatrists are biased towards making a statistical type 2 error.

If calling a sane person sick is a Type 2 error, what is the doctor’s null hypothesis?

Answer 1

In Rosenhan's context, the null hypothesis is that a patient is not sick, meaning they are sane. A Type 2 error would occur if a sane person is falsely identified as sick, which aligns with psychiatrists' tendency as noted by Rosenhan.

Step-by-step explanation:

In Rosenhan's study, the statement that psychiatrists are biased towards making a statistical type 2 error refers to the inclination to incorrectly identify a sane person as sick (a false negative). Here, the null hypothesis would be that the patient is not sick.

A Type 1 error occurs when the null hypothesis is rejected even though it is true, meaning a healthy patient would be incorrectly diagnosed as ill. In contrast, a Type 2 error is when the null hypothesis is not rejected when it's false, which would mean a sick patient is assumed healthy.

The implications of such errors in the medical and psychiatric fields are significant, as they can lead to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment options.