I don't think that the 'null hypothesis of no effect' and 'chance being the sole factor at play' are equivalent concepts.
PREMISE I am not a professional statistician, so I would like this blog to be understood as a space for sharing my reflections rather than a collection of "lessons" (which is why I named it "Statistical Thoughts" rather than "Statistical Certainties"). Of course, here I try to express my opinion in a convincing - but hopefully honest - way! ARGUMENTATION Here I critique (I welcome any potential rebuttals) the concept of 'null hypothesis of no effect or association' as an equivalent version of 'chance is the only factor at play.' Indeed, within a frequentist-inferential statistical model, chance is always the only factor at play! A P-value is a number calculated based on other numbers (the observed test statistic and degrees of freedom) that have no memory of how they were generated nor are "aware" of the practical meaning we assign to the numbers we put in the corresponding formulas (e.g., average values, standard deviations, sa...