Question

According to the February 2008 Federal Trade Commission report on consumer fraud and identity theft, 23% of all complaints in 2007 were for identity theft. In that year, Alaska had 321 complaints of identity theft out of 1,432 consumer complaints ("Consumer fraud and," 2008). Does this data provide enough evidence to show that Alaska had a lower proportion of identity theft than 23%? State the type I and type II errors in this case, consequences of each error type for this situation, and the appropriate alpha level to use.

**I only need type I and type II errors & what the appropriate alpha level would be for this question

Answer 1

Claim : Alaska had a lower proportion of identity theft than 23%

H0 : P = 23%

Ha : P < 23%

Type I error : reject H0 ,when in real H0 is true.

So type I error in this case is : we rejected the null H0 and concluded that Alaska had lower proportion of identity theft than 23%, but in actual Alaska had lower proportion of identity theft equal to 23%

Type I I error : Fail to reject H0 , when in real H0 is false.

So type II error in this case : we fail to reject null H0 and concluded that Alaska had lower proportion of the identity theft equal to 23% but in actual Alaska had lower proportion of identity theft than 23%