I would just say that we do not, do not reject, reject the null hypothesis. And so let's say when I do all of these calculations, I get a p-value, which would put me in this scenario right over here, let's say that I get a p-value of 0.03. 0.03 is indeed less than 0.05, so I would reject the null hypothesis and say that I have evidence for the alternative. And this should hopefully make logical sense because what we're saying is, hey, look, we took a sample, and if we assume the null hypothesis, the probability of getting that sample is 3%. It's 3 100ths, and so since that probability is less than our probability threshold here, we'll reject it and say we have evidence for the alternative. On the other hand, there might have been a scenario where we do all of the calculations here and we figure out a p-value, a p-value that we get is equal to 0.5, which you can interpret as saying that, hey, if we assume the null hypothesis is true, that there's no change due to making the background yellow, I would have a 50% chance of getting this result. And in that situation, since it's higher than my significance level, I wouldn't reject the null hypothesis.