“Failing to reject the null” denotes the fact that a null hypothesis has not been disproven. The term “not rejecting” does not imply “accepting.” On the other hand, the null hypothesis denotes to the fact that what one is trying to substantiate has not happened, stated as zero. For instance, when two teaching approaches do not give rise to different examination performance, it points to a zero difference. At the same time, another significant relationship is that there is no hypothetical relationship between athletic performance (with a zero slope) and anxiety. Thus failing to reject the null premise does not point to the fact that a no difference has been shown (accept null hypothesis).
In a court setting, if a suspect is proven “not guilty,” it does not imply that he did not commit the offense. It is a way of suggesting that there was not sufficient substantiation to that he committed the offense. In accepting the null, it means that there is a possibility of the null hypothesis and that the outcome results are dependable with the null hypothesis. Lastly, accepting the null hypothesis third criterion denotes the fact that the test was a commendable trial to get an effect. Thus, from the three stated rules, failing to reject the null is not the same as accepting the null. In the statistic hypothesis trial, the only likely outcomes are rejecting the null hypothesis or failing to reject the null hypothesis.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
A null hypothesis can never be proven; a trial only fails to reject it by finalizing that the alternative hypothesis is true at a given chosen level, such as a 95 percent confidence level.
