Hello, I am studying for exams and would appreciate peoples thoughts on this review question from a chapter in my textbook.


A researcher wants to understand the relationship between mental health and socioeconomic status (SES) among Australians.
Previous international research suggests that people from low SES backgrounds tend to have poor mental health outcomes. In these studies, mental health is measured using a well-validated scale that ranges from -100 (very poor mental health) to +100 (excellent mental health).

In the international studies, the population’s average mental health scores tend to be close to 0 (zero), but those from low SES backgrounds have mean mental health scores of -50 (SD = 20).

The researcher randomly samples 500 Australians who identify as coming from low SES backgrounds and has them complete the mental health scale described above. The mean mental health score for the sample is 80 (SD = 10). The researcher’s statistical analyses suggest this is an unexpected result in light of the previous research.

Using the logic of null hypothesis testing, what are two interpretations for the researcher’s findings? What can the researcher do to ascertain whether this unexpected finding reflects the wider population of Australians from low SES backgrounds?