I am confused. There is a question / claim, which says this:
Original Claim: the percentage of Blue M & M's is greater than 5%. The hypothesis test results in a P-value of 0.0010, given alpha = 0.05
So everything is fine so far. I have the
P-value and compare it with
alpha. Obviously, P-Value < Alpha, so I am rejecting the null hypothesis.
The null hypothesis I used is: H0: P > 0.05...
Everything still fine...
But, after that, I've asked to state a final conclusion and I see this in the answer model:
There is sufficient evidence to support the claim that the percentage of blue M&M's is greater than 5%
Here, you can imagine a facepalm image of me, because this is just weird. I have rejected the null hypothesis, saying that the M & M's are not greater than 5%, thus: how can it say there is evidence they ARE greater than 5% while I have rejected it?
Am I doing something wrong here? Do I get the definitons wrong or something? Is rejecting actually saying it is correct? I don't get it...
Please, can someone explain this to me?
Edit: in my slides, nor my teacher has said that I need an equal sign in my null hypothesis, while Google tells me to do that... so am I correct when I assume that my null hypothesis should be H0: P = 0.05 instead? And when I reject this... the conclusion starts making sense... but am I making sense now?