Posts Tagged ‘ Miscellaneous Statistics ’

Can talk therapy halve the rate of cancer recurrence? How to think about the statistical significance of this finding? Is it just another example of the garden of forking paths?

May 21, 2015
By

James Coyne (who we last encountered in the sad story of Ellen Langer) writes: I’m writing to you now about another matter about which I hope you will offer an opinion. Here is a critique of a study, as well as the original study that claimed to find an effect of group psychotherapy on time […] The post Can talk therapy halve the rate of cancer recurrence? How to think…

Read more »

The connection between varying treatment effects and the well-known optimism of published research findings

May 14, 2015
By

Jacob Hartog writes: I thought this article [by Hunt Allcott and Sendhil Mullainathan], although already a couple of years old, fits very well into the themes of your blog—in particular the idea that the “true” treatment effect is likely to vary a lot depending on all kinds of factors that we can and cannot observe, […] The post The connection between varying treatment effects and the well-known optimism of published…

Read more »

My talk at MIT this Thursday

May 13, 2015
By

When I was a student at MIT, there was no statistics department. I took a statistics course from Stephan Morgenthaler and liked it. (I’d already taken probability and stochastic processes back at the University of Maryland; my instructor in the latter class was Prof. Grace Yang, who was super-nice. I couldn’t follow half of what […] The post My talk at MIT this Thursday appeared first on Statistical Modeling, Causal…

Read more »

There’s something about humans

May 12, 2015
By

An interesting point came up recently. In the abstract to my psychology talk, I’d raised the question: If we can’t trust p-values, does experimental science involving human variation just have to start over? In the comments, Rahul wrote: Isn’t the qualifier about human variation redundant? If we cannot trust p-values we cannot trust p-values. My […] The post There’s something about humans appeared first on Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and…

Read more »

There’s No Such Thing As Unbiased Estimation. And It’s a Good Thing, Too.

May 11, 2015
By
There’s No Such Thing As Unbiased Estimation. And It’s a Good Thing, Too.

Following our recent post on econometricians’ traditional privileging of unbiased estimates, there were a bunch of comments echoing the challenge of teaching this topic, as students as well as practitioners often seem to want the comfort of an absolute standard such as best linear unbiased estimate or whatever. Commenters also discussed the tradeoff between bias […] The post There’s No Such Thing As Unbiased Estimation. And It’s a Good Thing,…

Read more »

“The general problem I have with noninformatively-derived Bayesian probabilities is that they tend to be too strong.”

May 1, 2015
By

We interrupt our usual programming of mockery of buffoons to discuss a bit of statistical theory . . . Continuing from yesterday‘s quotation of my 2012 article in Epidemiology: Like many Bayesians, I have often represented classical confidence intervals as posterior probability intervals and interpreted one-sided p-values as the posterior probability of a positive effect. […] The post “The general problem I have with noninformatively-derived Bayesian probabilities is that they…

Read more »

Good, mediocre, and bad p-values

April 30, 2015
By

From my 2012 article in Epidemiology: In theory the p-value is a continuous measure of evidence, but in practice it is typically trichotomized approximately into strong evidence, weak evidence, and no evidence (these can also be labeled highly significant, marginally significant, and not statistically significant at conventional levels), with cutoffs roughly at p=0.01 and 0.10. […] The post Good, mediocre, and bad p-values appeared first on Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference,…

Read more »

Carl Morris: Man Out of Time [reflections on empirical Bayes]

April 29, 2015
By

I wrote the following for the occasion of his recent retirement party but I thought these thoughts might of general interest: When Carl Morris came to our department in 1989, I and my fellow students were so excited. We all took his class. The funny thing is, though, the late 1980s might well have been […] The post Carl Morris: Man Out of Time [reflections on empirical Bayes] appeared first…

Read more »

What’s the most important thing in statistics that’s not in the textbooks?

April 28, 2015
By
What’s the most important thing in statistics that’s not in the textbooks?

As I wrote a couple years ago: Statistics does not require randomness. The three essential elements of statistics are measurement, comparison, and variation. Randomness is one way to supply variation, and it’s one way to model variation, but it’s not necessary. Nor is it necessary to have “true” randomness (of the dice-throwing or urn-sampling variety) […] The post What’s the most important thing in statistics that’s not in the textbooks?…

Read more »

Statistical analysis on a dataset that consists of a population

April 25, 2015
By

This is an oldie but a goodie. Donna Towns writes: I am wondering if you could help me solve an ongoing debate? My colleagues and I are discussing (disagreeing) on the ability of a researcher to analyze information on a population. My colleagues are sure that a researcher is unable to perform statistical analysis on […] The post Statistical analysis on a dataset that consists of a population appeared first…

Read more »


Subscribe

Email:

  Subscribe