Using epistemic ratios to evaluate hypotheses: an imprecision penalty for imprecise hypotheses.

According to Bayesians, the null hypothesis significance-testing procedure is not deductively valid because it involves the retention or rejection of the null hypothesis under conditions where the posterior probability of that hypothesis is not known. Other criticisms are that this procedure is pointless and encourages imprecise hypotheses. However, according to non-Bayesians, there is no way of assigning a prior probability to the null hypothesis, and so Bayesian statistics do not work either. Consequently, no procedure has been accepted by both groups as providing a compelling reason to accept or reject hypotheses. The author aims to provide such a method. In the process, the author ...

More articles like this:

Loading
We're searching over:
  • 60 million articles
  • 3,500 publications


Newsweek Harper's Magazine The Washington Post Chicago Tribune Crain's Chicago Business PRNewswire Pediatric News The Nation Advertising Age The Economist (US) Register Register