Will the Real Junk Science Please Stand Up?
Junk Science (as first coined).* Have you ever noticed in wranglings over evidence-based policy that it’s always one side that’s politicizing the evidence—the side whose policy one doesn’t like? The...
View ArticleIn defense of statistical recipes, but with enriched ingredients (scientist...
Scientist sees squirrel Evolutionary ecologist, Stephen Heard (Scientist Sees Squirrel) linked to my blog yesterday. Heard’s post asks: “Why do we make statistics so hard for our students?” I recently...
View ArticleP-value madness: A puzzle about the latest test ban (or ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’)
. Given the excited whispers about the upcoming meeting of the American Statistical Association Committee on P-Values and Statistical Significance, it’s an apt time to reblog my post on the “Don’t Ask...
View Article“Frequentist Accuracy of Bayesian Estimates” (Efron Webinar announcement)
Brad Efron The Royal Statistical Society sent me a letter announcing their latest Journal webinar next Wednesday 21 October: …RSS Journal webinar on 21st October featuring Bradley Efron, Andrew Gelman...
View ArticleStatistical “reforms” without philosophy are blind (v update)
. Is it possible, today, to have a fair-minded engagement with debates over statistical foundations? I’m not sure, but I know it is becoming of pressing importance to try. Increasingly, people are...
View Article3 YEARS AGO (OCTOBER 2012): MEMORY LANE
3 years ago… MONTHLY MEMORY LANE: 3 years ago: October 2012. I mark in red three posts that seem most apt for general background on key issues in this blog.[1] Posts that are part of a “unit” or a...
View ArticleWHIPPING BOYS AND WITCH HUNTERS (ii)
. At least as apt today as 3 years ago…HAPPY HALLOWEEN! Memory Lane with new comments in blue. In an earlier post I alleged that frequentist hypotheses tests often serve as whipping boys, by which I...
View Article