But you would be surprised if they all had 11, 10 is your null hypothesis. It’s not context, it’s proper controls and the scientific method. This was very very careless
They did have a null hypothesis and a control group. The problem was that the non-control was different from the control in a way they were careless with, that the scientific methodology does not catch (that peer review and replication ought to have caught). e.g. if the favorable results were better explained by subjects seeing soup taken out of the pot vs. from the can rather than the temperature itself.