Next section: At what level is H

The proper interpretation of the test is as follows: A person made a rather extraordinary claim and should be able to provide strong evidence in support of the claim if the claim is to believed. The test provided data consistent with the null hypothesis that the person has no special ability since a person with no special ability would be able to predict as well or better more than 40% of the time. Therefore, there is no compelling reason to believe the extraordinary claim. However, the test does not prove the person cannot predict better than chance; it simply fails to provide evidence that he or she can. The probability that the null hypothesis is true is not determined by the statistical analysis conducted as part of hypothesis testing. Rather, the probability computed is the probability of obtaining data as different or more different from the null hypothesis (given that the null hypothesis is true) as the data actually obtained.

Next section: At what level is H