  This paper re-visits the problem of deciding between two simple hypotheses,
the setting considered by Neyman and Pearson in developing their fundamental
lemma. It studies the decision process induced by the most powerful test and
the receiver operating characteristic function associated with this decision
process. It addresses the question of how to report the decision arising from
the decision function. It also examines the P-functional (the P-value
statistic) and its role in the decision-making process. The impetus of this
work is the continuing criticisms of statistical decision-making procedures
that use the P-functional and a level of significance (LoS) of 0.05. A point
made is that if one is going to use the value of the P-functional, then it
should be used in an equivalent manner as the most powerful decision function,
but if one wants to obtain from its value the degree of support for either
hypotheses, then the value of its density under the alternative is the proper
quantity to use. Replicability of results are discussed. Knowledge updating
through Bayes theorem when given the decision or the value of the P-functional
is also discussed, and it is argued that sequential learning is a coherent way
of finding the truth. But the impact of publication bias is also demonstrated
to be quite serious in the search for truth. It is argued that decision-makers
are free to choose their own LoS, since the additional summary measures will
automatically take their LoS choices into consideration. Three approaches for
choosing an optimal LoS are discussed and a procedure for sample size
determination is described. Ideas are illustrated by concrete problems and by
the lady tea-tasting experiment of Fisher which ushered null hypothesis
significance testing. It is hoped that by considering this fundamental setting
of simple hypotheses, a better understanding of more complex settings will
ensue.
