Multiple Perspectives on Inference for Two Simple Statistical Scenarios

Noah N. N. van Dongen, Johnny B. van Doorn, Quentin F. Gronau, Don van Ravenzwaaij, Rink Hoekstra, Matthias N. Haucke, Daniel Lakens, Christian Hennig, Richard D. Morey, Saskia Homer, Andrew Gelman, Jan Sprenger and Eric-Jan Wagenmakers

The American Statistician, 2019, vol. 73, issue S1, 328-339

Abstract: When data analysts operate within different statistical frameworks (e.g., frequentist versus Bayesian, emphasis on estimation versus emphasis on testing), how does this impact the qualitative conclusions that are drawn for real data? To study this question empirically we selected from the literature two simple scenarios—involving a comparison of two proportions and a Pearson correlation—and asked four teams of statisticians to provide a concise analysis and a qualitative interpretation of the outcome. The results showed considerable overall agreement; nevertheless, this agreement did not appear to diminish the intensity of the subsequent debate over which statistical framework is more appropriate to address the questions at hand.

Date: 2019
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00031305.2019.1565553 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:amstat:v:73:y:2019:i:s1:p:328-339

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/UTAS20

DOI: 10.1080/00031305.2019.1565553

Access Statistics for this article

The American Statistician is currently edited by Eric Sampson

More articles in The American Statistician from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().