A Rejoinder

Dennis Farlie and Ian Budge

British Journal of Political Science, 1976, vol. 6, issue 1, 126-127

Abstract: Whiteley's comment presents a ‘full’ Bayesian argument for the identification of councillors. A Bayesian analysis is a procedure by which an individual can make coherent judgements between hypotheses in terms of conceptual gambles. It is important to recognize that the coherence is between the individual's prior and posterior beliefs when presented with evidence and is not to be interpreted as the agreement between the decision and the correct decision. There is in the argument no appeal to the probability of a correct decision as a relative frequency concept. In many circumstances the correct decision may be undecidable so that a frequentist approach would be inapplicable anyway. Two Bayesians who disagree on their prior beliefs concerning a finite number of hypotheses will disagree on their posterior beliefs when presented with the same data provided that no hypothesis is declared impossible by the data.

Date: 1976
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/ ... type/journal_article link to article abstract page (text/html)

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:cup:bjposi:v:6:y:1976:i:01:p:126-127_00

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in British Journal of Political Science from Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press, UPH, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8BS UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kirk Stebbing ().