Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
Type I and Type II Errors/Evidence
Method evidence record

Type I and Type II Errors

In hypothesis testing, two types of errors can occur: Type I error (false positive, rejecting a true null hypothesis) and Type II error (false negative, failing to reject a false null hypothesis). Formalized by Neyman and Pearson (1933), these errors are at the heart of statistical decision-making. The probability of Type I error is controlled by the significance level α (conventionally 0.05); the probability of Type II error is β, and power = 1 − β. Understanding and balancing these errors is critical for designing robust, reliable research.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Source record

Citations copied verbatim from the method’s source record. No claim-level verification is inferred from them.

Type I and Type II Errors: Understanding False Positives and False Negatives in Hypothesis Testing
Taxonomic method record · process-pipeline / research-statistics
  • Neyman, J., & Pearson, E. S. (1933). On the problem of the most efficient tests of statistical hypotheses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 231, 289–337. · DOI 10.1098/rsta.1933.0009
  • Altman, D. G., & Bland, J. M. (1994). Statistics notes: Diagnostic tests 1: sensitivity and specificity. BMJ, 308(6943), 1552. · DOI 10.1136/bmj.308.6943.1552
  • Lehmann, E. L., & Romano, J. P. (2005). Testing Statistical Hypotheses (3rd ed.). Springer. · ISBN 0-387-98864-5
Open full method

Curated claims

Claims persisted in the evidence ledger, each with its own assessment.

No curated claims yet

This view does not invent a claim assessment when the ledger has none.

Related methods

Generated from the method graph and shown as machine-suggested relations — no evidence claim is inferred.

Same method familyConfidence Intervalmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyNull Hypothesis Testingmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyP-Value and Statistical Significancemachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyStatistical Power and Sample Sizemachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Evidence status

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Sources

3 recorded citations, copied from the method source record.

Actions

Open method page
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account