The mean age of judges in Dallas is greater than 50.2 years. If a hypothesis test is performed, how should you interpret a decision that fails to reject the null hypothesis?

There is insufficient evidence to support the claim that the mean age is greater than 50.2 years. i.e ( μ > 50.2)

Step-by-step explanation:

Given that:

The mean age of judges in Dallas is greater than 50.2 years.

If a hypothesis test is performed, then the null and the alternative hypothesis can be computed as follows:

The null hypothesis is that the mean age of the judges in Dallas is equal to 50.2

i.e

The alternative hypothesis is that the mean age of the judges in Dallas is greater than 50.2

i.e

Decision Rule: Fail to reject the null hypothesis.

The interpretation of this decision rule implies that:

There is insufficient evidence to support the claim that the mean age is greater than 50.2 years. i.e ( μ > 50.2)

Ung letter a

Step-by-step explanation:

Actually how to solve it