Here are all the slides along with the video from the 11 January Phil Stat Forum with speakers: Deborah G. Mayo, Yoav Benjamini and moderator/discussant David Hand.
Monthly Archives: February 2022
January 11 Forum: “Statistical Significance Test Anxiety” : Benjamini, Mayo, Hand
Can’t Take the Fiducial Out of Fisher (if you want to understand the N-P performance philosophy) [i]
Continuing with posts in recognition of R.A. Fisher’s birthday, I reblog (with a few new comments) one from a few years ago on a topic that had previously not been discussed on this blog: Fisher’s fiducial probability
[Neyman and Pearson] “began an influential collaboration initially designed primarily, it would seem to clarify Fisher’s writing. This led to their theory of testing hypotheses and to Neyman’s development of confidence intervals, aiming to clarify Fisher’s idea of fiducial intervals (D.R.Cox, 2006, p. 195).
R.A. Fisher: “Statistical methods and Scientific Induction” with replies by Neyman and E.S. Pearson
In recognition of Fisher’s birthday (Feb 17), I reblog what I call the “Triad”–an exchange between Fisher, Neyman and Pearson (N-P) a full 20 years after the Fisher-Neyman break-up–adding a few new introductory remarks here. While my favorite is still the reply by E.S. Pearson, which alone should have shattered Fisher’s allegations that N-P “reinterpret” tests of significance as “some kind of acceptance procedure”, they are all chock full of gems for different reasons. They are short and worth rereading. Neyman’s article pulls back the cover on what is really behind Fisher’s over-the-top polemics, what with Russian 5-year plans and commercialism in the U.S. Not only is Fisher jealous that N-P tests came to overshadow “his” tests, he is furious at Neyman for driving home the fact that Fisher’s fiducial approach had been shown to be inconsistent (by others). The flaw is glaring and is illustrated very simply by Neyman in his portion of the triad. Further details may be found in my book, SIST (2018) especially pp 388-392 linked to here. It speaks to a common fallacy seen every day in interpreting confidence intervals. As for Neyman’s “behaviorism”, Pearson’s last sentence is revealing. Continue reading
Happy Birthday R.A. Fisher: ‘Two New Properties of Mathematical Likelihood’
Today is R.A. Fisher’s birthday. I’ll reblog some Fisherian items this week with a few new remarks. This paper comes just before the conflicts with Neyman and Pearson (N-P) erupted. Fisher links his tests and sufficiency, to the Neyman and Pearson lemma in terms of power. It’s as if we may see Fisher and N-P as ending up in a similar place while starting from different origins, as David Cox might say . Unfortunately, the blow-up that occurred soon after is behind today’s misdirected war vs statistical significance tests.* I quote just the most relevant portions…the full article is linked below.** Happy Birthday Fisher! Continue reading
“Should Science Abandon Statistical Significance?” Session at AAAS Annual Meeting, Feb 18
Karen Kafadar, Yoav Benjamini, and Donald Macnaughton will be in a session:
Should Science Abandon Statistical Significance?
Friday, Feb 18 from 2-2:45 PM (EST) at the AAAS 2022 annual meeting.
The general program is here. To register*, go to this page.
The concept of statistical significance is central in scientific research. However, the concept is often poorly understood and thus is often unfairly criticized. This presentation includes three independent but overlapping arguments about the usefulness of the concept of statistical significance to reliably detect “effects” in frontline scientific research data. We illustrate the arguments with examples of scientific importance from genomics, physics, and medicine. We explain how the concept of statistical significance provides a cost-efficient objective way to empower scientific research with evidence.
Papers Continue reading
January 11 PhilStat Forum: Mayo: “The Stat Wars and Intellectual Conflicts of Interest”
Here are my slides on my Editorial in Conservation Biology: “The Statistics Wars and Intellectual Conflicts of Interest” Mayo (2021) presented at the 11 January Phil Stat Forum with speakers: Deborah G. Mayo and Yoav Benjamini and moderator David Hand. (Benjamini’s slides & full Video to come shortly)
For more details on the focus and background readings see this post on the Phil Stat Forum blog or this post January 10 post.
ENBIS Webinar: Statistical Significance and p-values
Yesterday’s event video recording is available at:
European Network for Business and Industrial Statistics (ENBIS) Webinar:
Statistical Significance and p-values
→ Europe/Amsterdam (CET); 08:00-09:30 am (EST)
ENBIS will dedicate this webinar to the memory of Sir David Cox, who sadly passed away in January 2022.