References

Deborah G. Mayo

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 September 2018

Deborah G. Mayo

Show author details

Deborah G. Mayo: Affiliation:
Virginia Tech

Book contents

Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Statistical Inference as Severe Testing
How to Get Beyond the Statistics Wars
, pp. 446 - 470

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107286184 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Achinstein, P. (2000). ‘Why Philosophical Theories of Evidence Are (And Ought to Be) Ignored by Scientists’, in Howard, D. (ed.), Proceedings of the 1998 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association, Philosophy of Science 67, S180–92.Google Scholar

Achinstein, P. (2001). The Book of Evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Achinstein, P. (2010). ‘Mill’s Sins or Mayo’s Errors?’ In Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 170–88.Google Scholar

Akaike, H. (1973). ‘Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle’, in Petrov, B. and Csaki, F. (eds.), 2nd International Symposium on Information Theory. Akademia Kiado, Budapest, pp. 267–81.Google Scholar

American Statistical Association (2017). Recommendations to Funding Agencies for Supporting Reproducible Research. amstat.org/asa/News/ASA-Develops-Reproducible-Research-Recommendations.aspx.Google Scholar

Armitage, P. (1961). ‘Contribution to the Discussion in Smith, C.A.B., “Consistency in Statistical Inference and Decision”’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 23, 1–37.Google Scholar

Armitage, P. (1962). ‘Contribution to Discussion’, in Savage, L. J. (ed.), pp. 62–103.Google Scholar

Armitage, P. (1975). Sequential Medical Trials, 2nd edn. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Armitage, P. (2000). ‘Comments on the Paper by Lindley’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D 49(3), 319–20.Google Scholar

Collaboration, ATLAS (2012a). ‘Latest Results from ATLAS Higgs Search’, Press statement, ATLAS Updates, July 4, 2012. http://atlas.cern/updates/press-statement/latest-results-atlas-higgs-search.Google Scholar

Collaboration, ATLAS (2012b). ‘Observations of a New Particle in the Search for the Standard Model Higgs Boson with the Atlas Detector at the LHC’, Physics Letters B 716(2012), 1–29.Google Scholar

Collaboration, ATLAS (2012c). ‘Updated ATLAS Results on the Signal Strength of the Higgs-like Boson for Decays into WW and Heavy Fermion Final States’, ATLAS-CONF-2012-162. ATLAS Note, November 14, 2012. http://cds.cern.ch/record/1494183/files/ATLAS-CONF-2012-162.pdf.Google Scholar

Bacchus, F., Kyburg, H., and Thalos, M. (1990). ‘Against Conditionalization’, Synthese 85(3), 475–506.CrossRef Google Scholar

Baggerly, K. and Coombes, K. (2009). ‘Deriving Chemosensitivity from Cell Lines: Forensic Bioinformatics and Reproducible Research in High-throughput Biology’, Annals of Applied Statistics 3(4), 1309–34.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bailar, J. (1991). ‘Scientific Inferences and Environmental Health Problems’, Chance 4(2), 27–38.10.1080/09332480.1991.11882428CrossRef Google Scholar

Bakan, D. (1970). ‘The Test of Significance in Psychological Research’, in Morrison, D. and Henkel, R. (eds.), pp. 231–51.Google Scholar

Baker, M. (2016). ‘1,500 Scientists Lift the Lid on Reproducibility’, Nature 533, 452–4.10.1038/533452aCrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Banerjee, A. and Duflo, E. (2011). Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty, 1st edn. New York: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar

Barnard, G. A. (1950). ‘On the Fisher-Behrens Test’, Biometrika 37(3/4), 203–7.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Barnard, G. (1962). ‘Contribution to Discussion’, in Savage, L. J. (ed.), pp. 62–103.Google Scholar

Barnard, G. (1971). ‘Scientific Inferences and Day to Day Decisions’, in Godambe, V. and Sprott, D. (eds.), pp. 289–300.Google Scholar

Barnard, G. (1972). ‘The Logic of Statistical Inference (Review of “The Logic of Statistical Inference” by Ian Hacking)’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 23(2), 123–32.Google Scholar

Barnard, G. (1985). A Coherent View of Statistical Inference, Statistics Technical Report Series. Department of Statistics & Actuarial Science, University of Waterloo, Canada.Google Scholar

Bartlett, M. (1936). ‘The Information Available in Small Samples’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 32, 560–6.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bartlett, M. (1939). ‘Complete Simultaneous Fiducial Distributions’, Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 10, 129–38.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bartlett, T. (2012a). ‘Daniel Kahneman Sees “Train-Wreck Looming” for Social Psychology’, Chronicle of Higher Education, online (10/4/2012).Google Scholar

Bartlett, T. (2012b). ‘The Researcher Behind the Ovulation Voting Study Responds’, Chronicle of Higher Education online (10/28/2012).Google Scholar

Bayarri, M. and Berger, J. (2004). ‘The Interplay between Bayesian and Frequentist Analysis’, Statistical Science 19, 58–80.10.1214/088342304000000116CrossRef Google Scholar

Bayarri, M., Benjamin, D., Berger, J., and Sellke, T. (2016). ‘Rejection Odds and Rejection Ratios: A Proposal for Statistical Practice in Testing Hypotheses’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 72, 90–103.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Bem, D. (2011). ‘Feeling the Future: Experimental Evidence for Anomalous Retroactive Influences on Cognition and Affect’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 100(3), 407–425.10.1037/a0021524CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Bem, D., Utts, J., and Johnson, W. (2011). ‘Must Psychologists Change the Way They Analyze Their Data?’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(4), 716–719.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Benjamin, D. and Berger, J. (2016). ‘Comment: A Simple Alternative to P-values on Wasserstein, R. and Lazar, N. 2016, “The ASA’s Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose”’, The American Statistician 70(2) (supplemental materials).Google Scholar

Benjamin, D., Berger, J., Johannesson, M., et al. (2017). ‘Redefine Statistical Significance’, Nature Human Behaviour 2, 6–10.10.1038/s41562-017-0189-zCrossRef Google Scholar

Benjamini, Y. (2008). ‘Comment: Microarrays, Empirical Bayes and the Two-Groups Model’, Statistical Science 23(1), 23–8.10.1214/07-STS236BCrossRef Google Scholar

Benjamini, Y. and Hochberg, Y. (1995). ‘Controlling the False Discovery Rate: A Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, B 57, 289–300.10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.xCrossRef Google Scholar

Berger, J. (2003). ‘Could Fisher, Jeffreys and Neyman Have Agreed on Testing?’ and ‘Rejoinder’, Statistical Science 18(1), 1–12; 28–32.10.1214/ss/1056397485CrossRef Google Scholar

Berger, J. (2006). ‘The Case for Objective Bayesian Analysis’ and ‘Rejoinder’, Bayesian Analysis 1(3), 385–402; 457–64.10.1214/06-BA115CrossRef Google Scholar

Berger, J. (2008). ‘A Comparison of Testing Methodologies’, in Proceedings of the PHYSTAT-LHC Workshop on Statistical Issues for LHC Physics, June 2008, CERN 2008-001, pp. 8–19.Google Scholar

Berger, J. and Bernardo, J. (1992). ‘On the Development of Reference Priors’, in Bernardo, J., Berger, J., Dawid, A. and Smith, A. (eds.), Bayesian Statistics Volume 4, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 35–60.Google Scholar

Berger, J. and Sellke, T. (1987). ‘Testing a Point Null Hypothesis: The Irreconcilability of P Values and Evidence (with Discussion and Rejoinder)’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 82(397), 112–22; 135–9.Google Scholar

Berger, J. and Wolpert, R. (1988). The Likelihood Principle, 2nd edn., Vol. 6. Lecture Notes-Monograph Series. Hayward, CA: Institute of Mathematical Statistics.10.1214/lnms/1215466210CrossRef Google Scholar

Berger, R. (2014). ‘Comment on S. Senn’s post: “Blood Simple?” The complicated and controversial world of bioequivalence’, Guest Blogpost on Errorstatistics.com (7/31/2014).Google Scholar

Berger, R. and Hsu, J. (1996). ‘Bioequivalence Trials, Intersection-union Tests and Equivalence Confidence Sets’, Statistical Science 11(4), 283–302.10.1214/ss/1032280304CrossRef Google Scholar

Bernardo, J. (1997). ‘Non-informative Priors Do Not Exist: A Discussion’, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 65, 159–89.Google Scholar

Bernardo, J. (2008). ‘Comment on Article by Gelman’, Bayesian Analysis 3(3), 451–4.10.1214/08-BA318ACrossRef Google Scholar

Bernardo, J. (2010). ‘Integrated Objective Bayesian Estimation and Hypothesis Testing’ (with discussion), Bayesian Statistics 9, 1–68.Google Scholar

Berry, S. and Kadane, J. (1997). ‘Optimal Bayesian Randomization’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 59(4), 813–19.Google Scholar

Bertrand, J. ([1889]/ 1907). Calcul des Probabilités. Paris: Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Birnbaum, A. (1962). ‘On the Foundations of Statistical Inference’, in Kotz, S. and Johnson, N. (eds.), Breakthroughs in Statistics, 1, Springer Series in Statistics, New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 478–581. (First published with discussion in Journal of the American Statistical Association 57(298), 269–326.)Google Scholar

Birnbaum, A. (1969). ‘Concepts of Statistical Evidence’, in Morgenbesser, S., Suppes, P., and White, M. (eds.), Philosophy, Science, and Method: Essays in Honor of Ernest Nagel, New York: St. Martin’s Press, pp. 112–43.Google Scholar

Birnbaum, A. (1970). ‘Statistical Methods in Scientific Inference’ (letter to the Editor), Nature 225(5237), 1033.10.1038/2251033a0CrossRef Google Scholar

Birnbaum, A. (1977). ‘The Neyman-Pearson Theory as Decision Theory, and as Inference Theory; with a Criticism of the Lindley-Savage Argument for Bayesian Theory’, Synthese 36(1), 19–49.10.1007/BF00485690CrossRef Google Scholar

Bogen, J. and Woodward, J. (1988). ‘Saving the Phenomena’, Philosophical Review 97(3), 303–52.CrossRef Google Scholar

Borel, E. ([1914]/ 1948). Le Hasard. Paris: Alcan.Google Scholar

Bowley, A. (1934). ‘Discussion and Commentary’ pp. 131–3 in Neyman 1934.Google Scholar

Box, G. (1979). ‘Robustness in the Strategy of Scientific Model Building’, in Launer, R. and Wilkinson, G. (eds.), Robustness in Statistics, New York: Academic Press, 201–36.Google Scholar

Box, G. (1983). ‘An Apology for Ecumenism in Statistics’, in Box, G., Leonard, T., and Wu, D. (eds.), Scientific Inference, Data Analysis, and Robustness, New York: Academic Press, 51–84.10.1016/B978-0-12-121160-8.50009-0CrossRef Google Scholar

Box, G. and Jenkins, G. (1976). Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control. San Francisco: Holden-Day.Google Scholar

Box, J. (1978). R. A. Fisher: The Life of a Scientist. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar

Breiman, L. (1997). ‘No Bayesians in Foxholes’, part of ‘Banter on Bayes: Debating the Usefulness of Bayesian Approaches to Solving Practical Problems’, hosted by Hearst, M., IEEE Expert: Intelligent Systems and Their Applications 12(6), 21–4.CrossRef Google Scholar

Brown, E. N. and Kass, R. E. (2009). ‘What is Statistics?’ (with discussion), The American Statistician 63, 105–23.10.1198/tast.2009.0019CrossRef Google Scholar

Buchen, L. (2009). ‘May 29, 1919: A Major Eclipse, Relatively Speaking’, Wired online (5/29/2009).Google Scholar

Buehler, R. J. and Feddersen, A. P. (1963). ‘Note on a Conditional Property of Student’s t’, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 34(3), 1098–100.CrossRef Google Scholar

Burgman, M. (2005). Risk and Decision for Conservation and Environmental Management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511614279CrossRef Google Scholar

Burnham, K. and Anderson, D. (2002). Model Selection and Multimodal Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Burnham, K. and Anderson, D. (2014). ‘P values Are Only an Index to Evidence: 20th- vs. 21st-century Statistical Science’, Ecology 95(3), 627–30.10.1890/13-1066.1CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Byrd, J. (2018). ‘Models and Methods for Osteometric Sorting’, in Adams, B. and Byrd, J. (eds.), Recovery, Analysis, and Identification of Commingled Human Remains, Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, pp. 199–220.Google Scholar

Carlin, B. and Louis, T. (2008). Bayesian Methods for Data Analysis, 3rd edn. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC.CrossRef Google Scholar

Carnap, R. (1962). Logical Foundations of Probability, 2nd edn. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Cartlidge, E. (2016). ‘Theorizing About the LHC’s 750 GeV Bump’, Physicsworld.com (4/19/2016).Google Scholar

Cartwright, N. (2012). ‘RCTs, Evidence, and Predicting Policy Effectiveness’, in Kincaid, H., The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Social Science, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Cartwright, N. and Hardie, J. (2012). Evidence-Based Policy: A Practical Guide to Doing It Better. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Casella, G. and Berger, R. (1987a). ‘Reconciling Bayesian and Frequentist Evidence in the One-sided Testing Problem’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 82(397), 106–11.CrossRef Google Scholar

Casella, G. and Berger, R. (1987b). ‘Comment on Testing Precise Hypotheses by J. O. Berger and M. Delampady’, Statistical Science 2(3), 344–7.10.1214/ss/1177013243CrossRef Google Scholar

Casella, G. and Berger, R. (2002). Statistical Inference, 2nd edn. Belmont, CA: Duxbury Press.Google Scholar

Castelvecchi, D. and Gibney, E. (2016). ‘Hints of New LHC Particle Get Slightly Stronger’, Nature online (3/18/2016).CrossRef Google Scholar

Center for Open Science, University of Virginia (2015). Reproducibility Project: cos.io/pr/2015–09-29.Google Scholar

Chalmers, A. (2010). ‘Can Scientific Theories Be Warranted?’, in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 58–72.Google Scholar

Cherkassky, V. (2012). ‘Vladimir Cherkassky Responds on Foundations of Simplicity’, Guest Blogpost on Errorstatistics.com (7/6/2012).Google Scholar

Experiment, CMS (2012). ‘Observation of a New Particle with a Mass of 125 GeV’, Press statement, Compact Muon Solenoid Experiment at CERN [blog], July 4, 2012. http://cms.web.cern.ch/news/observation-new-particle-mass-125-gev.Google Scholar

The Cochrane Collaboration: cochrane.org.Google Scholar

Cohen, J. (1962). ‘The Statistical Power of Abnormal-Social Psychological Research: A Review’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 65, 145–53.10.1037/h0045186CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Cohen, J. (1990). ‘Things I Have Learned (So Far)’, American Psychologist 45(12), 1304–12.CrossRef Google Scholar

Colquhoun, D. (2011). ‘In Praise of Randomisation: The Importance of Causality in Medicine and Its Subversion by Philosophers of Science’, Proceedings of the British Academy 171, 321–40.Google Scholar

Colquhoun, D. (2014). ‘An Investigation of the False Discovery Rate and the Misinterpretation of P-values’, Royal Society Open Science 1(3), 140216 (16 pages).10.1098/rsos.140216CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Committee on Science, Technology, Law Policy and Global Affairs, Committee on the Development of the Third Edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, and Federal Judicial Center (2011). Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, 3rd edn. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar

COMpare Team (2015). ‘Letter to NEJM (Dan Longo, Deputy Editor)’ on 11/ 25/2015 (compare-trials.org).Google Scholar

Coombes, K., Wang, J., and Baggerly, K. (2007). ‘Microarrays: Retracing Steps’, Nature Medicine 13(11), 1276–7.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Cousins, R. (2017). ‘The Jeffreys-Lindley Paradox and Discovery Criteria in High Energy Physics’, Synthese 194, 395–432.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cox, D. (1958). ‘Some Problems Connected with Statistical Inference’, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 29(2), 357–72.10.1214/aoms/1177706618CrossRef Google Scholar

Cox, D. (1977). ‘The Role of Significance Tests’ (with Discussion), Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 4, 49–70.Google Scholar

Cox, D. (1978). ‘Foundations of Statistical Inference: The Case for Eclecticism’, Australian Journal of Statistics 20(1), 43–59.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cox, D. (1982). ‘Statistical Significance Tests’, British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 14, 325–331.10.1111/j.1365-2125.1982.tb01987.xCrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Cox, D. (1995). ‘Comment on “Model Uncertainty, Data Mining and Statistical Inference by C. Chatfield”’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A 158, 419–66.Google Scholar

Cox, D. (2000). ‘Comments on the Paper by Lindley’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D 49(3), 321–4.Google Scholar

Cox, D. (2006a). Principles of Statistical Inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813559CrossRef Google Scholar

Cox, D. (2006b). ‘Frequentist and Bayesian Statistics: A Critique’ (keynote address), in Statistical Problems in Particle Physics, Astrophysics and Cosmology, Lyons, L. and Ünel, Müge Karagöz (eds.), London: Imperial College Press, pp. 3–6.Google Scholar

Cox, D. and Hinkley, D. (1974). Theoretical Statistics. London: Chapman and Hall.10.1007/978-1-4899-2887-0CrossRef Google Scholar

Cox, D. and Mayo, D. (2010). ‘Objectivity and Conditionality in Frequentist Inference’, in Mayo, D and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 276–304.Google Scholar

Cox, D. and Mayo, D. (2011). ‘A Statistical Scientist Meets a Philosopher of Science: A Conversation between Sir David Cox and Deborah Mayo’, in Rationality, Markets and Morals (RMM) 2, 103–14.Google Scholar

Crupi, V. and Tentori, K. (2010). ‘Irrelevant Conjunction: Statement and Solution of a New Paradox’, Philosophy of Science 77, 1–13.10.1086/650205CrossRef Google Scholar

Cumming, G. (2012). Understanding the New Statistics: Effect Sizes, Confidence Intervals, and Meta-analysis. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Dawid, A. (1976). ‘Properties of Diagnostic Data Distributions’, Biometrics 32(3), 647–58.10.2307/2529753CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dawid, A. (2000). ‘Comment on a Paper by Lindley’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D 49(3), 325–6.Google Scholar

Dawid, A. (2015). ‘Comment’ on ‘Can You Change Your Bayesian Prior?’, Blogpost on Errorstatistics.com (6/18/2015).Google Scholar

Dawid, A., Stone, M., and Zidek, J. (1973). ‘Marginalization Paradoxes in Bayesian and Structural Inference’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 35(2), 189–233.10.1111/j.2517-6161.1973.tb00952.xCrossRef Google Scholar

Deaton, A. (2010). ‘Instruments, Randomization, and Learning about Development’, Journal of Economic Literature 48(2), 424–55.10.1257/jel.48.2.424CrossRef Google Scholar

de Finetti, B. (1972). Probability, Induction and Statistics: The Art of Guessing. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

de Finetti, B. (1974). Theory of Probability: A Critical Introductory Treatment, 2 volumes. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Diaconis, P. (1978). ‘Statistical Problems in ESP Research’, Science 201(4351), 131–6.10.1126/science.663642CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dienes, Z. (2008). Understanding Psychology as a Science: An Introduction to Scientific and Statistical Inference. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Dominus, S. (2017). ‘When the Revolution Came for Amy Cuddy’, The New York Times Magazine, New York Times Company (October 18, 2017).Google Scholar

Doudna, J. and Charpentier, E. (2014). ‘The New Frontier of Genome Engineering with CRISPR-Cas9’, Science 346(6213), 1077 (1–9).CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Draper, D. and Madigan, D. (1997). ‘The Scientific Value of Bayesian Statistical Methods’, part of ‘Banter on Bayes: Debating the Usefulness of Bayesian Approaches to Solving Practical Problems,’ hosted by Hearst, M., IEEE Intelligent Systems and Their Applications 12(6), 18–20.Google Scholar

Duhem, P. (1954). The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dupré, J. (1993). The Disorder of Things. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Durante, K., Rae, A., and Griskevicius, V. (2013). ‘The Fluctuating Female Vote: Politics, Religion, and the Ovulatory Cycle’, Psychological Science 24(6), 1007–16.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dyson, E., Eddington, A., and Davidson, C. (1920). ‘A Determination of the Deflection of Light by the Sun’s Gravitational Field, from Observations Made at the Total Eclipse of May 29, 1919’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, A220, 291–333.Google Scholar

Earman, J. (1992). Bayes or Bust?: A Critical Examination of Bayesian Confirmation Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Earman, J. and Glymour, C. (1980). ‘Relativity and Eclipses: The British Eclipse Expeditions of 1919 and Their Predecessors’, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 11(1), 49–85.CrossRef Google Scholar

Eddington, A. ([1920]1987). Space, Time and Gravitation: An Outline of the General Relativity Theory, Cambridge Science Classics Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Edwards, A. F. (1972). Likelihood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Edwards, W., Lindman, H., and Savage, L. (E, L, & S) (1963). ‘Bayesian Statistical Inference for Psychological Research’, Psychological Review 70(3), 193–242.10.1037/h0044139CrossRef Google Scholar

Efron, B. (1979). ‘Bootstrap Methods: Another Look at the Jackknife’, The Annals of Statistics 7(1), 1–26.10.1214/aos/1176344552CrossRef Google Scholar

Efron, B. (1986). ‘Why Isn’t Everyone a Bayesian?’, The American Statistician 40(1), 1–5.10.1080/00031305.1986.10475342CrossRef Google Scholar

Efron, B. (1998). ‘R. A. Fisher in the 21st Century’ and ‘Rejoinder’, Statistical Science 13(2), 95–114; 121–2.Google Scholar

Efron, B. (2000). ‘Comments on the Paper by Lindley’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D 49(3), 330–1.Google Scholar

Efron, B. (2013). ‘A 250-Year Argument: Belief, Behavior, and the Bootstrap’, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 50(1), 126–46.Google Scholar

Ellis, P. (2010). Essential Guide to Effect Sizes: Statistical Power, Meta-Analysis, and the Interpretation of Research Results. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511761676CrossRef Google Scholar

Feynman, R. (1974). ‘Cargo Cult Science,’ Caltech Commencement Speech. Reprinted in Surely You’re Joking Mr. Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character (1985), New York: Norton & Company, pp. 382–91.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1926). ‘The Arrangement of Field Experiments’, Journal of Ministry of Agriculture 33, 503–13.Google Scholar Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1930). ‘Inverse Probability’, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 26(4), 528–35.10.1017/S0305004100016297CrossRef Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1934a). Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd. (First published in 1925.) Reprinted in Fisher 1990.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1934b). ‘Two New Properties of Mathematical Likelihood’, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A 144 (852), 285–307.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1934c). ‘Discussion and Commentary’ pp. 137–8 in Neyman 1934.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1935a). The Design of Experiments, 1st edn., Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd. Reprinted in Fisher 1990.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1935b). ‘The Logic of Inductive Inference’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 98(1), 39–82.10.2307/2342435CrossRef Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1936), ‘Uncertain Inference’, Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 71, 248–58.CrossRef Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1938). ‘Presidential Address’, Sankhyā: The Indian Journal of Statistics 4(1), 14–17.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1939). ‘The Comparison of Samples with Possibly Unequal Variances’, Annals of Eugenics IX (pt II), 174–80. Reprinted in Fisher, R. (1950) (‘Author’s Note’ 35.173a-35.173b); 35.174-35.180.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1950). Contributions to Mathematical Statistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1955). ‘Statistical Methods and Scientific Induction’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 17(1), 69–78.CrossRef Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1956). Statistical Methods and Scientific Inference. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd. Reprinted in Fisher 1990.Google Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1990). Statistical Methods, Experimental Design, and Scientific Inference, (ed.), Bennett, J. H. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198522294.001.0001CrossRef Google Scholar

Fitelson, B. (2002). ‘Putting the Irrelevance Back into the Problem of Irrelevant Conjunction’, Philosophy of Science 69(4), 611–22.10.1086/344624CrossRef Google Scholar

Folks, J. (1995). ‘A Conversation with Oscar Kempthorne’, Statistical Science 10(4), 321–36.CrossRef Google Scholar

Forster, M. and Sober, E. (1994). ‘How to Tell When Simpler, More Unified, or Less Ad Hoc Theories Will Provide More Accurate Predictions’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45(1), 1–35.10.1093/bjps/45.1.1CrossRef Google Scholar

Fraser, D. (1961). ‘On Fiducial Inference’, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 32(3), 661–676.CrossRef Google Scholar

Fraser, D. (1998). ‘[R. A. Fisher in the 21st Century]: Comment’, Statistical Science 13(2), 118–120.Google Scholar

Fraser, D. (2011). ‘Is Bayes Posterior Just Quick and Dirty Confidence?’ and ‘Rejoinder’, Statistical Science 26(3), 299–316; 329–31.10.1214/11-STS352CrossRef Google Scholar

Fraser, D. (2014). ‘Why Does Statistics Have Two Theories?’, in Lin, X., Banks, D., Genest, C., Molenberghs, G., Scott, D. and Wang, J.-L. (eds.), Past, Present and Future of Statistical Science, 237–252. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar

Fraser, D. and Reid, N. (2002). ‘Strong Matching of Frequentist and Bayesian Parametric Inference’, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 103, 263–85.CrossRef Google Scholar

Freedman, D. (2009). Statistical Models: Theory and Practice, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511815867CrossRef Google Scholar

Freiman, J. A., Chalmers, T. C., Smith, H., and Kuebler, R. R. (1978). ‘The Importance of Beta, the Type II Error and Sample Size in the Design and Interpretation of the Randomized Control Trial: Survey of 71 Negative Trials’, The New England Journal of Medicine 299(13), 690–4.10.1056/NEJM197809282991304CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gaifman, H. and Vasudevan, A. (2012). ‘Deceptive Updating and Minimal Information Methods’, Synthese 187(1), 147–78.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gelman, A. (2011). ‘Induction and Deduction in Bayesian Data Analysis’, Rationality, Markets and Morals (RMM) 2, 67–78.Google Scholar

Gelman, A. (2012). ‘Ethics and the Statistical Use of Prior Information’, Chance Magazine 25(4), 52–4.Google Scholar

Gelman, A. (2013). ‘P Values and Statistical Practice’, Epidemiology 24(1), 69–72.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gelman, A. (2015). ‘Comment on “Can You Change Your Bayesian Prior (ii)”’. Blogpost on Errorstatistics.com (6/18/2015).Google Scholar

Gelman, A. and Carlin, J. (2014). ‘Beyond Power Calculations: Assessing Type S (Sign) and Type M (Magnitude) Errors’, Perspectives on Psychological Science 9, 641–51.10.1177/1745691614551642CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gelman, A., Carlin, J., Stern, H., et al. (2004). Bayesian Data Analysis, 2nd edn. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.Google Scholar

Gelman, A. and Hennig, C. (2017). ‘Beyond Subjective and Objective in Statistics’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A 180(4), 967–1033.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gelman, A. and Loken, E. (2014). ‘The Statistical Crisis in Science’, American Scientist 2, 460–5.Google Scholar

Gelman, A., Meng, X-L., and Stern, H. (1996). ‘Posterior Predictive Assessment of Model Fitness Via Realized Discrepancies’ (with Discussion), Statistica Sinica 6, 733–807.Google Scholar

Gelman, A. and Robert, C. (2013). ‘“Not Only Defended but Also Applied”: The Perceived Absurdity of Bayesian Inference’ and ‘Rejoinder’, The American Statistician 67(1), 1–5; 15–6.10.1080/00031305.2013.760987CrossRef Google Scholar

Gelman, A. and Shalizi, C. (2013). ‘Philosophy and the Practice of Bayesian Statistics’ and ‘Rejoinder’, British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 66(1), 8–38; 76–80.10.1111/j.2044-8317.2011.02037.xCrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gibbons, J. D. and Pratt, J. W. (1975). ‘P-values: Interpretation and Methodology’, The American Statistician 29(1), 20–5.Google Scholar

Giere, R. N. (1969). ‘Bayesian Statistics and Biased Procedures’, Synthese 20(3), 371–87.10.1007/BF00413734CrossRef Google Scholar

Giere, R. N. (1988). Explaining Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. (1991). ‘How to Make Cognitive Illusions Disappear: Beyond “Heuristics and Biases”’, European Review of Social Psychology 2, 83–115.10.1080/14792779143000033CrossRef Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Adaptive Thinking: Rationality in the Real World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195153729.001.0001CrossRef Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. (2004). ‘Mindless Statistics’, Journal of Socio-Economics 33(5), 587–606.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. and Marewski, J. (2015). ‘Surrogate Science: The Idol of a Universal Method for Scientific Inference’, Journal of Management 41(2), 421–40.10.1177/0149206314547522CrossRef Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., Swijtink, Z., Porter, T., et al. (1989). Empire of Chance: How Probability Changed Science and Everyday Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Gill, R. (2014). ‘Who Ya Gonna Call for Statistical Fraudbusting? R. A. Fisher, P-values, and Error Statistics (Again)’, Guest Blogpost on Errorstatistics.com (5/10/2014).Google Scholar

Gillies, D. (2000). Philosophical Theories of Probability. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Gillies, D. (2001). ‘Bayesianism and the Fixity of the Theoretical Framework’, in Corfield, D. and Williamson, J. (eds.), Foundations of Bayesianism 24, The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 363–79.10.1007/978-94-017-1586-7_15CrossRef Google Scholar

Ghosh, J., Delampady, M., and Samanta, T. (2010). An Introduction to Bayesian Analysis: Theory and Methods. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Glymour, C. (1980). Theory and Evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Glymour, C. (2010). ‘Explanation and Truth’, in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 331–50.Google Scholar

Godambe, V. and Sprott, D. (eds.) (1971). Foundations of Statistical Inference. Toronto: Holt, Rinehart and Winston of Canada.Google Scholar

Goldacre, B. (2008). Bad Science. London: HarperCollins Publishers.Google Scholar

Goldacre, B. (2012). Bad Pharma: How Drug Companies Mislead Doctors and Harm Patients. London: Fourth Estate.Google Scholar

Goldacre, B. (2016). ‘Make Journals Report Clinical Trials Properly’, Nature 530(7588), 7.10.1038/530007aCrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Goldman, A. (1986). Epistemology and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Goldman, A. (1999). Knowledge in a Social World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0198238207.001.0001CrossRef Google Scholar

Good, I. J. (1971a). ‘The Probabilistic Explication of Information, Evidence, Surprise, Causality, Explanation, and Utility’ and ‘Reply’, in Godambe, V. and Sprott, D. (eds.), pp. 108–22, 131–41.Google Scholar

Good, I. J. (1971b). ‘Commentary on D. J. Bartholomew’ in Godambe, V. and Sprott, D. (eds.), p. 431.Google Scholar

Good, I. J. (1976). ‘The Bayesian Influence, or How to Sweep Subjectivism Under the Carpet’, in Harper, W. and Hooker, C. (eds.), pp. 25–174.Google Scholar

Good, I. J. (1983). Good Thinking: The Foundations of Probability and Its Applications. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Goodman, S. (1992). ‘A Comment on Replication, P-values and Evidence’, Statistics in Medicine 11(7), 875–9.10.1002/sim.4780110705CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Goodman, S. (1993). ‘P-values, Hypothesis Tests, and Likelihood: Implications for Epidemiology of a Neglected Historical Debate’, American Journal of Epidemiology 137(5), 485–96.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Goodman, S. (1999). ‘Toward Evidence-Based Medical Statistics. 2: The Bayes Factor’, Annals of Internal Medicine, 130(12), 1005–13.Google Scholar PubMed

Goodman, S. and Greenland, S. (2007). ‘Assessing the Unreliability of the Medical Literature: A Response to “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False”’, Johns Hopkins University, Department of Biostatistics Working Papers. Working Paper 135, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar

Gopnik, A. (2009). August 11 Interview in The Edge, https://edge.org/conversation/amazing-babies.Google Scholar

Gorroochurn, P. (2016). Classic Topics on the History of Modern Mathematical Statistics: From Laplace to More Recent Times, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.CrossRef Google Scholar

Greenland, S. (2012). ‘Nonsignificance Plus High Power Does Not Imply Support for the Null Over the Alternative’, Annals of Epidemiology 22, 364–8.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Greenland, S. and Poole, C. (2013). ‘Living with P Values: Resurrecting a Bayesian Perspective on Frequentist Statistics’ and ‘Rejoinder: Living with Statistics in Observational Research’, Epidemiology 24(1), 62–8; 73–8.10.1097/EDE.0b013e3182785741CrossRef Google Scholar

Greenland, S., Senn, S., Rothman, K., et al. (2016). ‘Statistical Tests, P values, Confidence Intervals, and Power: A Guide to Misinterpretations’, European Journal of Epidemiology 31(4), 337–50.10.1007/s10654-016-0149-3CrossRef Google Scholar

Gurney, J., Mueller, B., Davis, S., et al. (1996). ‘Childhood Brain Tumor Occurrence in Relation to Residential Power Line Configurations, Electric Heating Sources, and Electric Appliance Use’, American Journal of Epidemiology 143, 120–8.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Hacking, I. (1965). Logic of Statistical Inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hacking, I. (1972). ‘Review: Likelihood’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 23(2), 132–7.10.1093/bjps/23.2.132CrossRef Google Scholar

Hacking, I. (1980). ‘The Theory of Probable Inference: Neyman, Peirce and Braithwaite’, in Mellor, D. (ed.), Science, Belief and Behavior: Essays in Honour of R. B. Braithwaite, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 141–60.Google Scholar

Haidt, J. and Iyer, R. (2016). ‘How to Get Beyond Our Tribal Politics’, Wall Street Journal (11/10/2016).Google Scholar

Haig, B. (2016). ‘Tests of Statistical Significance Made Sound’, Educational and Psychological Measurement 77(3) 489–506.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Hand, D. (2014). The Improbability Principle: Why Coincidences, Miracles, and Rare Events Happen Every Day, 1st edn. New York: Scientific American/ Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar

Hannig, J. (2009). ‘On Generalized Fiducial Inference’, Statistica Sinica 19, 491–544.Google Scholar

Harlow, H. (1958). ‘The Nature of Love’, American Psychologist 13, pp. 673–85.10.1037/h0047884CrossRef Google Scholar

Harper, W. and Hooker, C. (eds.) (1976). Foundations of Probability Theory, Statistical Inference and Statistical Theories of Science, Volume II. Boston, MA: D. Reidel.Google Scholar

Hawthorne, J. and Fitelson, B. (2004). ‘Re-Solving Irrelevant Conjunction with Probabilistic Independence’, Philosophy of Science 71, 505–14.10.1086/423626CrossRef Google Scholar

Hempel, C. G. (1945). ‘Studies in the Logic of Confirmation (I.)’, Mind 54(213), 1–26.10.1093/mind/LIV.213.1CrossRef Google Scholar

Hendry, D. (2011). ‘Empirical Economic Model Discovery and Theory Evaluation’, Rationality, Markets and Morals (RMM) 2, 115–45.Google Scholar

Hitchcock, C. and Sober, E. (2004). ‘Prediction versus accommodation and the risk of overfitting’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55(1), 1–34.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hoenig, J. and Heisey, D. (2001). ‘The Abuse of Power: The Pervasive Fallacy of Power Calculations in Data Analysis’, The American Statistician 55(1), 1–6.CrossRef Google Scholar

Howson, C. (1997a). ‘A Logic of Induction’, Philosophy of Science 64(2), 268–90.10.1086/392551CrossRef Google Scholar

Howson, C. (1997b). ‘Error Probabilities in Error’, Philosophy of Science 64, Supplemental Issue PSA 1996: Symposia Papers. Edited by Darden, L. (1996). S185–S194.CrossRef Google Scholar

Howson, C. (2017). ‘Putting on the Garber Style? Better Not’, Philosophy of Science 84(4), 659–76.10.1086/693466CrossRef Google Scholar

Howson, C. and Urbach, P. (1993). Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach. La Salle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar

Hubbard, R., and Bayarri, M. J. (2003). ‘Confusion Over Measures of Evidence versus Errors’ and ‘Rejoinder’, The American Statistician 57(3), 171–8; 181–2.10.1198/0003130031856CrossRef Google Scholar

Huber, P. J. (2011). Data Analysis: What Can Be Learned from the Past 50 Years?, New York: Wiley.10.1002/9781118018255CrossRef Google Scholar

Huff, D. (1954). How to Lie with Statistics, 1st edn. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar

Hume, D. (1739). A Treatise of Human Nature. BiblioBazaar.Google Scholar

Hurlbert, S. and Lombardi, C. (2009). ‘Final Collapse of the Neyman-Pearson Decision Theoretic Framework and Rise of the NeoFisherian’, Annales Zoologici Fennici 46, 311–49.CrossRef Google Scholar

Ioannidis, J. (2005). ‘Why Most Published Research Findings are False’, PLoS Medicine 2(8), 0696–0701.10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ioannidis, J. (2016). ‘The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses’, Milbank Quarterly 94(3), 485–514.10.1111/1468-0009.12210CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Irony, T. and Singpurwalla, N. (1997). ‘Non-informative Priors Do not Exist: A Dialogue with José M. Bernardo’, Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 65(1), 159–77.CrossRef Google Scholar

Jefferys, W. and Berger, J. (1992). ‘Ockham’s Razor and Bayesian Analysis’, American Scientist 80, 64–72.Google Scholar

Jeffreys, H. (1919). ‘Contribution to Discussion on the Theory of Relativity’, and ‘On the Crucial Test of Einstein’s Theory of Gravitation’, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 80, 96–118; 138–54.10.1093/mnras/80.2.138CrossRef Google Scholar

Jeffreys, H. ([1939]/ 1961). Theory of Probability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Jeffreys, H. (1955). ‘The Present Position in Probability Theory’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 5, 275–89.CrossRef Google Scholar

Johnson, V. (2013a). ‘Revised Standards of Statistical Evidence’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) 110(48), 19313–17.10.1073/pnas.1313476110CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Johnson, V. (2013b). ‘Uniformly Most Powerful Bayesian Tests’, The Annals of Statistics 41(4), 1716–41.10.1214/13-AOS1123CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Kadane, J. (2006). ‘Is “Objective Bayesian Analysis” Objective, Bayesian, or Wise? (Comment on Articles by Berger and by Goldstein)’, Bayesian Analysis 1(3), 433–6.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kadane, J. (2008). ‘Comment on Article by Gelman’, Bayesian Analysis 3(3), 455–8.10.1214/08-BA318BCrossRef Google Scholar

Kadane, J. (2011). Principles of Uncertainty. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC.10.1201/b11322CrossRef Google Scholar

Kadane, J. (2016). ‘Beyond Hypothesis Testing’, Entropy 18(5), article 199, 1–5.10.3390/e18050199CrossRef Google Scholar

Kahneman, D. (2012). ‘A proposal to deal with questions about priming effects’ email. Link to letter in Bartlett 2012a.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D. (2014). ‘A New Etiquette for Replication’, Social Psychology 45(4), 299–311.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., and Tversky, A. (1982). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511809477CrossRef Google Scholar

Kaku, M. (2005). Einstein’s Cosmos: How Albert Einstein’s Vision Transformed Our Understanding of Space and Time (Great Discoveries). New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar

Kalbfleisch, J. and Sprott, D. (1976). ‘On Tests of Significance’, in Harper, W. and Hooker, C., pp. 259–72.Google Scholar

Kass, R. (1998). ‘[R. A. Fisher in the 21st Century]: Comment.’ Statistical Science 13(2), 115–16.Google Scholar

Kass, R. (2011). ‘Statistical Inference: The Big Picture (with discussion and rejoinder)’, Statistical Science 26(1), 1–20.10.1214/10-STS337CrossRef Google Scholar

Kass, R. and Wasserman, L. (1996). ‘The Selection of Prior Distributions by Formal Rules’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 91, 1343–70.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kaye, D. and Freedman, D. (2011). ‘Reference Guide on Statistics’, in Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, 3rd edn. pp. 83–178.Google Scholar

Kempthorne, O. (1976). ‘Statistics and the Philosophers’, in Harper, W. and Hooker, C. (eds.), 273–314.Google Scholar

Kennefick, D. (2009). ‘Testing Relativity from the 1919 Eclipse: A Question of Bias’, Physics Today 62(3), 37–42.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kerridge, D. (1963). ‘Bounds for the Frequency of Misleading Bayes Inferences’, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 34(3), 1109–10.CrossRef Google Scholar

Keynes, J. (1921). A Treatise on Probability. London: MacMillan and Co.Google Scholar

Kheifets, L., Sussman, S., and Preston-Martin, S. (1999). ‘Childhood Brain Tumors and Residential Electromagnetic Fields (EMF)’, Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 159, 111–29.Google Scholar PubMed

Kish, L. (1970). ‘Some Statistical Problems in Research Design’, in Morrison, D. and Henkel, R. (eds.), pp. 127–41. (First published 1959, American Sociological Review 24(3), 328).CrossRef Google Scholar

Kruschke, J. K. and Liddell, T. M. (2017). ‘The Bayesian New Statistics: Hypothesis Testing, Estimation, Meta-analysis, and Power Analysis from a Bayesian Perspective’, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1–29.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. (1970). ‘Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research?’, in Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (eds.), pp. 1–23.Google Scholar

Kyburg, H. (1992). ‘The Scope of Bayesian Reasoning’, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992, 139–52.10.1086/psaprocbienmeetp.1992.2.192830CrossRef Google Scholar

Kyburg, H. (2003). ‘Probability as a Guide to Life’, in Kyburg, H. E. and Thalos, M. (eds.), pp. 135–52.Google Scholar

Kyburg, H. and Thalos, M. (eds.) (2003). Probability Is the Very Guide of Life: The Philosophical Uses of Chance. Chicago, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar

Lad, F. (2006). ‘Objective Bayesian Statistics … Do You Buy It? Should We Sell It? (Comment on Articles by Berger and by Goldstein)’, Bayesian Analysis 1(3), 441–4.10.1214/06-BA116FCrossRef Google Scholar

Lakatos, I. (1970). ‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, in Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (eds.), pp. 91–138.Google Scholar

Lakatos, I. (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511621123CrossRef Google Scholar

Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (eds.) (1970). Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139171434CrossRef Google Scholar

Lakens, D. (2017). ‘Equivalence Tests: A Practical Primer for t Tests, Correlations, and Meta-analyses’, Social Psychological & Personality Science 8(4), 355–62.10.1177/1948550617697177CrossRef Google Scholar

Lakens, D., et al. (2018). ‘Justify your Alpha’, Nature Human Behavior 2, 168–71.10.1038/s41562-018-0311-xCrossRef Google Scholar

Lambert, C. (2010). ‘Stop Ignoring Experimental Design (or My Head Will Explode)’, Blogpost on GoldenHelix.com (9/29/2010).Google Scholar

Lambert, C. and Black, L. (2012). ‘Learning From Our GWAS Mistakes: From Experimental Design to Scientific Method’, Biostatistics 13(2), 195–203.10.1093/biostatistics/kxr055CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Lambert, P., Sutton, A., Burton, P., Abrams, K., and Jones, D. (2005). ‘How Vague is Vague? A Simulation Study of the Impact of the Use of Vague Prior Distributions in MCMC Using WinBUGS’, Statistics in Medicine 24, 2401–28.10.1002/sim.2112CrossRef Google Scholar

Laudan, L. (1978). Progress and Its Problems. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Laudan, L. (1983). ‘The Demise of the Demarcation Problem’, in Cohen, R. S. and Laudan, L. (eds.), Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel, pp. 111–27.Google Scholar

Laudan, L. (1996). Beyond Positivism and Relativism: Theory, Method, and Evidence. Boulder, CL: Westview Press.Google Scholar

Laudan, L. (1997). ‘How About Bust? Factoring Explanatory Power Back into Theory Evaluation’, Philosophy of Science 64, 303–16.10.1086/392553CrossRef Google Scholar

Leek, J. (2016). ‘Statistical Vitriol’, Blogpost on SimplyStatistics.com (09/29/16).Google Scholar

Lehmann, E. (1981). ‘An Interpretation of Completeness and Basu’s Theorem’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 76(374), 335–40.10.1080/01621459.1981.10477652CrossRef Google Scholar

Lehmann, E. (1986). Testing Statistical Hypotheses, 2nd edn. New York: Wiley.10.1007/978-1-4757-1923-9CrossRef Google Scholar

Lehmann, E. (1988). ‘Jerzy Neyman, 1894–1981’, Technical Report No. 155, May 1988.Google Scholar

Lehmann, E. (1990). ‘Model Specification: The Views of Fisher and Neyman, and Later Developments’, Statistical Science 5(2), 160–168.10.1214/ss/1177012164CrossRef Google Scholar

Lehmann, E. (1993a). ‘The Bertrand-Borel Debate and the Origins of the Neyman-Pearson Theory’, in Ghosh, J., Mitra, S., Parthasarathy, K. and Prak Ma Rao, L. (eds.), Statistics and Probability: A Raghu Raj Bahadur Festschrift, New Delhi: Wiley Eastern, 371–80. Reprinted in Lehmann 2012, pp. 965–74.Google Scholar

Lehmann, E. (1993b). ‘The Fisher, Neyman-Pearson Theories of Testing Hypotheses: One Theory or Two?’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 88 (424), 1242–9.10.1080/01621459.1993.10476404CrossRef Google Scholar

Lehmann, E. (2011). Fisher, Neyman, and the Creation of Classical Statistics, 1st edn. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4419-9500-1CrossRef Google Scholar

Lehmann, E. (2012). Selected Works of E. L. Lehmann, Rojo, J. (ed.). New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Lehmann, E. and Romano, J. (2005). Testing Statistical Hypotheses, 3rd edn. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Letzter, R. (2016). ‘Scientists Are Furious after a Famous Psychologist Accused Her Peers of “Methodological Terrorism”’, Business Insider (9/22/2016), businessinsider.com/susan-fiske-methodological-terrorism-2016–9.Google Scholar

Levelt Committee, Noort Committee, Drenth Committee (2012). ‘Flawed Science: The Fraudulent Research Practices of Social Psychologist Diederik Stapel’, Stapel Investigation: Joint Tilburg/Groningen/Amsterdam investigation of the publications by Mr. Stapel (www.commissielevelt.nl/).Google Scholar

Levi, I. (1980). The Enterprise of Knowledge: An Essay on Knowledge, Credal Probability, and Change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Lindemann, F. (1919). ‘Contribution to “Discussion on the Theory of Relativity”’, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 80, 114.Google Scholar

Lindley, D. (1957). ‘A Statistical Paradox’, Biometrika 44, 187–92.10.1093/biomet/44.1-2.187CrossRef Google Scholar

Lindley, D. (1969). ‘Discussion of Compound Decisions and Empirical Bayes, J. B. Copas’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 31, 397–425.Google Scholar

Lindley, D. (1971). ‘The Estimation of Many Parameters’, in Godambe, V. and Sprott, D. (eds.), pp. 435–55.Google Scholar

Lindley, D. (1976). ‘Bayesian Statistics’, in Harper, W. and Hooker, C. (eds.), pp. 353–62.Google Scholar

Lindley, D. (1982). ‘The Role of Randomization in Inference’, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1982(2), 431–46.Google Scholar

Lindley, D. (2000). ‘The Philosophy of Statistics’ (with Discussion), Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D 49(3), 293–337.Google Scholar

Lindley, D. and Novick, M. (1981). ‘The Role of Exchangeability in Inference’, Annals of Statistics 9(1), 45–58.10.1214/aos/1176345331CrossRef Google Scholar

Little, R. (2006). ‘Calibrated Bayes: A Bayes/Frequentist Roadmap’, The American Statistician 60(3), 213–23.10.1198/000313006X117837CrossRef Google Scholar

Lodge, O. (1919). ‘Contribution to “Discussion on the Theory of Relativity”’, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 80, 106–9.Google Scholar

Logan, B. (2012). ‘Jackie Mason Review’, The Guardian (2/21/2012).Google Scholar

Longino, H. (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691187013CrossRef Google Scholar

Madigan, D. and Raftery, A. (1994). ‘Model Selection and Accounting for Model Uncertainty in Graphical Models Using Occam’s Window’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 89(428), 1535–46.10.1080/01621459.1994.10476894CrossRef Google Scholar

Maher, P. (2004). ‘Bayesianism and Irrelevant Conjunction’, Philosophy of Science 71, 515–20.CrossRef Google Scholar

Marcus, G. (2018). ‘Deep Learning: A Critical Appraisal’, arXiv: 1801.00631 preprint, 1–27.Google Scholar

Martin, R. and Liu, C. (2013). ‘Inferential Models: A Framework for Prior-free Posterior Probabilistic Inference’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 108, 301–13.10.1080/01621459.2012.747960CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (1980). ‘The Philosophical Relevance of Statistics’, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1980, 97–109.10.1086/psaprocbienmeetp.1980.1.192556CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (1983). ‘An Objective Theory of Statistical Testing’, Synthese 57(3), 297–340.10.1007/BF01064701CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (1988). ‘Toward a More Objective Understanding of the Evidence of Carcinogenic Risk’, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988, 2, 489–503.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (1991). ‘Novel Evidence and Severe Tests’, Philosophy of Science 58(4), 523–52.10.1086/289639CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (1996). Error and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226511993.001.0001CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (1997a). ‘Duhem’s Problem, the Bayesian Way, and Error Statistics, or “What’s Belief Got to Do with It?”’ and ‘Response to Howson and Laudan’, Philosophy of Science 64(2), 222–44, 323–33.10.1086/392549CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (1997b). ‘Severe Tests, Arguing From Error, and Methodological Underdetermination’, Philosophical Studies 86 (3), 243–66.10.1023/A:1017925128970CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2003a). ‘Severe Testing as a Guide for Inductive Learning’, in Kyburg, H. E. and Thalos, M. (eds.), pp. 89–117.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2003b). ‘Could Fisher, Jeffreys and Neyman Have Agreed on Testing? Commentary on J. Berger’s Fisher Address’, Statistical Science 18, 19–24.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2004). ‘An Error-statistical Philosophy of Evidence’ and ‘Rejoinder’, in Taper, M. and Lele, S. (eds.), pp. 79–97, 101–18.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2005a). ‘Peircean Induction and the Error-Correcting Thesis’, Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society: A Quarterly Journal in American Philosophy 41(2), 299–319.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2005b). ‘Evidence as Passing Severe Tests: Highly Probable versus Highly Probed Hypotheses’, in Achinstein, P. (ed.), Scientific Evidence, Johns Hopkins, pp. 95–127.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2008). ‘How to Discount Double-Counting When It Counts: Some Clarifications’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59, 857–79.10.1093/bjps/axn034CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2010a). ‘Learning from Error, Severe Testing, and the Growth of Theoretical Knowledge’, in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 28–57.10.1017/CBO9780511657528.003CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2010b). ‘An Error in the Argument from Conditionality and Sufficiency to the Likelihood Principle’, in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 305–14.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2010c). ‘Sins of the Epistemic Probabilist: Exchanges with Peter Achinstein’, in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 189–201.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2010d). ‘An Ad Hoc Save of a Theory of Adhocness?: Exchanges with John Worrall’, in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 155–169.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2010e). ‘Learning from Error: The Theoretical Significance of Experimental Knowledge’, The Modern Schoolman. Guest editor, Kent Staley. 87(3/4), (March/May 2010). Experimental and Theoretical Knowledge, The Ninth Henle Conference in the History of Philosophy, 191–217.10.5840/schoolman2010873/45CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2011). ‘Statistical Science and Philosophy of Science: Where Do/Should They Meet in 2011 (and Beyond)?’, Rationality, Markets and Morals (RMM) 2, 79–102.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2012a). ‘Statistical Science Meets Philosophy of Science Part 2: Shallow Versus Deep Explorations’, Rationality, Markets and Morals (RMM) 3, 71–107.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2012b). ‘Fallacy of Rejection and the Fallacy of Nouvelle Cuisine’, Blogpost on ErrorStatistics.com (4/4/2012).Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2013a). ‘Presented Version: On the Birnbaum Argument for the Strong Likelihood Principle’, JSM Proceedings, Section on Bayesian Statistical Science. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association, (2013), 440–53.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2013b). ‘The Error-Statistical Philosophy and the Practice of Bayesian Statistics: Comments on Gelman and Shalizi: “Philosophy and the Practice of Bayesian Statistics”’, British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 66(1), 57–64.10.1111/j.2044-8317.2012.02064.xCrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Mayo, D. (2014a). ‘Learning from Error: How Experiment Gets a Life (of Its Own)’, in Error and Uncertainty in Scientific Practice, Boumans, M., Hon, G. and Petersen, A. (eds.), London: Pickering and Chatto, pp. 57–77.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2014b). ‘On the Birnbaum Argument for the Strong Likelihood Principle’ (with discussion), Statistical Science 29(2), 227–39; 261–6.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2015). ‘Can You Change Your Bayesian Prior? (and discussion)’, Blogpost on ErrorStatistics.com (6/18/2015).Google Scholar

Mayo, D. (2016). ‘Don’t Throw Out the Error Control Baby with the Bad Statistics Bathwater: A Commentary on Wasserstein, R. L. and Lazar, N. A. 2016, “The ASA’s Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose”’, The American Statistician 70(2) (supplemental materials).Google Scholar

Mayo, D. and Cox, D. (2006). ‘Frequentist Statistics as a Theory of Inductive Inference’, in Rojo, J. (ed.), Optimality: The Second Erich L. Lehmann Symposium, Lecture Notes-Monograph series, Institute of Mathematical Statistics (IMS), 49, pp. 77–97. (Reprinted 2010 in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 247–75.)CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. and Kruse, M. (2001). ‘Principles of Inference and Their Consequences’, in Cornfield, D. and Williamson, J. (eds.), Foundations of Bayesianism. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 381–403.10.1007/978-94-017-1586-7_16CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. and Morey, R. (2017). ‘A Poor Prognosis for the Diagnostic Screening Critique of Statistical Tests’, OSF Preprint.CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (2004). ‘Methodology in Practice: Statistical Misspecification Testing’, Philosophy of Science: Symposia 2002 71, 1007–25.10.1086/425064CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (2006). ‘Severe Testing as a Basic Concept in a Neyman–Pearson Philosophy of Induction’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57(2), 323–57.10.1093/bjps/axl003CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.) (2010). Error and Inference: Recent Exchanges on Experimental Reasoning, Reliability, and the Objectivity and Rationality of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (2011). ‘Error Statistics’, in Bandyopadhyay, P. and Forster, M. (eds.), Philosophy of Statistics, 7, Handbook of the Philosophy of Science, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 153–98.Google Scholar

Meehl, P. (1978). ‘Theoretical Risks and Tabular Asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the Slow Progress of Soft Psychology’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 46, 806–34.10.1037/0022-006X.46.4.806CrossRef Google Scholar

Meehl, P. (1990). ‘Why Summaries of Research on Psychological Theories Are Often Uninterpretable’, Psychological Reports 66(1), 195–244.10.2466/pr0.1990.66.1.195CrossRef Google Scholar

Meehl, P. and Waller, N. (2002). ‘The Path Analysis Controversy: A New Statistical Approach to Strong Appraisal of Verisimilitude’, Psychological Methods 7(3), 283–300.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Mill, J. S. (1888). A System of Logic, 8th edn. New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar

Michell, J. (2008). ‘Is Psychometrics Pathological Science?’ Measurement 6, 7–24.Google Scholar

Miller, J. (2008). Naturalism & Objectivity: Methods and Meta-methods (dissertation), Virginia Tech.Google Scholar

Mignard, F. and Klioner, S. (2009). ‘Gaia: Relativistic Modelling and Testing’, Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union 5(S261), 306–14.10.1017/S174392130999055XCrossRef Google Scholar

Morrison, D. and Henkel, R. (eds.) (1970). The Significance Test Controversy: A Reader. Chicago, IL: Aldine De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Munafò, M., Nosek, B., Bishop, D., et al. (2017). ‘A Manifesto for Reproducible Science’, Nature Human Behaviour 1 (art 0021), 1–9.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Musgrave, A. (1974). ‘Logical versus Historical Theories of Confirmation’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 25(1), 1–23.10.1093/bjps/25.1.1CrossRef Google Scholar

Musgrave, A. (2010). ‘Critical Rationalism, Explanation and Severe Tests’, in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 88–112.Google Scholar

The National Women’s Health Network (NWHN) (2002). The Truth About Hormone Replacement Therapy: How to Break Free from the Medical Myths of Menopause. Roseville, CA: Random House, Prima Publishing.Google Scholar

Nelder, J. (2000). ‘Commentary on Lindley’s “The Philosophy of Statistics”’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D 49(3), 324–5.Google Scholar

Nevins, J. and Potti, A. (2015). ‘Nevins and Potti Respond to Perez’s Questions and Worries’, The Cancer Letter (January 9, 2015), cancerletter.com/articles/20150109_10/.Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1934). ‘On the Two Different Aspects of the Representative Method: The Method of Stratified Sampling and the Method of Purposive Selection’, The Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 97(4), 558–625. Reprinted 1967 Early Statistical Papers of J. Neyman, 98–141.10.2307/2342192CrossRef Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1937). ‘Outline of a Theory of Statistical Estimation Based on the Classical Theory of Probability’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A 236(767), 333–80. Reprinted 1967 in Early Statistical Papers of J. Neyman, 250–90.Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1941). ‘Fiducial Argument and the Theory of Confidence Intervals’, Biometrika 32(2), 128–50. Reprinted 1967 in Early Statistical Papers of J. Neyman: 375–94.10.1093/biomet/32.2.128CrossRef Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1950). First Course in Probability and Statistics. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1952). Lectures and Conferences on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, 2nd edn. Washington, DC: Graduate School of U.S. Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1955). ‘The Problem of Inductive Inference’, Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 8(1), 13–46.10.1002/cpa.3160080103CrossRef Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1956). ‘Note on an Article by Sir Ronald Fisher’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological) 18(2), 288–94.Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1957a). ‘“Inductive Behavior” as a Basic Concept of Philosophy of Science’, Revue de l‘Institut International de Statistique/Review of the International Statistical Institute 25(1/3), 7–22.10.2307/1401671CrossRef Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1957b). ‘The Use of the Concept of Power in Agricultural Experimentation’, Journal of the Indian Society of Agricultural Statistics IX(1), 9–17.Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1962). ‘Two Breakthroughs in the Theory of Statistical Decision Making’, Revue De l’Institut International De Statistique / Review of the International Statistical Institute, 30(1),11–27.10.2307/1402069CrossRef Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1967). Early Statistical Papers of J. Neyman. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1976). ‘Tests of Statistical Hypotheses and Their Use in Studies of Natural Phenomena’, Communications in Statistics: Theory and Methods 5(8), 737–51.Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1977). ‘Frequentist Probability and Frequentist Statistics’, Synthese 36(1), 97–131.10.1007/BF00485695CrossRef Google Scholar

Neyman, J. (1981). ‘Egon S. Pearson (August 11, 1895–June 12, 1980). An Appreciation’, The Annals of Statistics 9(1), 1–2.10.1214/aos/1176345328CrossRef Google Scholar

Neyman, J. and Pearson, E. (1928). ‘On the Use and Interpretation of Certain Test Criteria for Purposes of Statistical Inference: Part I’, Biometrika 20A(1/2), 175–240. Reprinted in Joint Statistical Papers, 1–66.Google Scholar

Neyman, J. and Pearson, E. (1933). ‘On the Problem of the Most Efficient Tests of Statistical Hypotheses’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A 231, 289–337. Reprinted in Joint Statistical Papers, 140–85.10.1098/rsta.1933.0009CrossRef Google Scholar

Neyman, J. and Pearson, E. (1936). ‘Contributions to the Theory of Testing Statistical Hypotheses’, Statistical Research Memoirs 1, 1–37. Reprinted in Joint Statistical Papers, 203–39.Google Scholar

Neyman, J. and Pearson, E. (1967). Joint Statistical Papers of J. Neyman and E. S. Pearson. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.10.1525/9780520339897CrossRef Google Scholar

O’Hagan, T. (2012). ‘Higgs Boson: Digest and Discussion’, August 20, 2012. https://www.scribd.com/document/220900274/Higgs-Boson.Google Scholar

O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy, New York: Penguin BooksGoogle Scholar

Open Science Collaboration (2015). ‘Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science’, Science 349(6251), 943–51.Google Scholar

Overbye, D. (2013). ‘Chasing the Higgs’, New York Times (March 5, 2013).Google Scholar

Pearson, E. (1947). ‘The Choice of Statistical Tests Illustrated on the Interpretation of Data Classed in a 2 × 2 Table’, Biometrika 34 (1/2), 139–167. Reprinted 1966 in The Selected Papers of E. S. Pearson, pp. 169–200.Google Scholar

Pearson, E. (1950). ‘On Questions Raised by the Combination of Tests Based on Discontinuous Distributions’, Biometrika, 37(3/4),383–98. Reprinted 1966 in The Selected Papers of E. S. Pearson, pp. 217–32.Google Scholar PubMed

Pearson, E. (1955). ‘Statistical Concepts in Their Relation to Reality’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B 17(2), 204–7.10.1111/j.2517-6161.1955.tb00194.xCrossRef Google Scholar

Pearson, E. (1962). ‘Some Thoughts on Statistical Inference’, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 33(2), 394–403. Reprinted 1966 in The Selected Papers of E. S. Pearson, pp. 276–83.10.1214/aoms/1177704566CrossRef Google Scholar

Pearson, E. (1966). The Selected Papers of E. S. Pearson. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Pearson, E. (1970). ‘The Neyman Pearson Story: 1926–34’, in Pearson, E. and Kendall, M. (eds.), Studies in History of Statistics and Probability, I. London: Charles Griffin & Co., 455–77.Google Scholar

Pearson, E. and Chandra Sekar, C. (1936). ‘The Efficiency of Statistical Tools and a Criterion for the Rejection of Outlying Observations’, Biometrika 28 (3/4), 308–20. Reprinted 1966 in The Selected Papers of E. S. Pearson, pp. 118–30.CrossRef Google Scholar

Pearson, E. and Neyman, J. (1930). ‘On the Problem of Two Samples,’ Bulletin of the Academy of Polish Sciences, 73–96. Reprinted 1966 in Joint Statistical Papers, 99–115.Google Scholar

Peirce, C. S. (1931–35). Collected Papers, Volumes 1–6. Hartsthorne, C. and Weiss, P. (eds.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Perez, B. (2015). ‘Research Concerns, The Med. Student’s Memo’, Cancer Letter, 1/9/2015.Google Scholar

Pigliucci, M. (2010). Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226667874.001.0001CrossRef Google Scholar

Pigliucci, M. (2013). ‘The Demarcation Problem: A (Belated) Response to Laudan’, in Pigliucci, M. and Boudry, M. (eds.), Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 9–28.10.7208/chicago/9780226051826.003.0002CrossRef Google Scholar

Popper, K. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Popper, K. (1962). Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Popper, K. (1983). Realism and the Aim of Science. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar

Potti, A., Dressman, H. K., Bild, A., et al. (2006). ‘Genomic Signatures to Guide the Use of Chemotherapeutics’, Nature Medicine 12(11), 1294–300.10.1038/nm1491CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Potti, A. and Nevins, J. (2007). ‘Potti et al. Reply’, Nature Medicine 13(11), 1277–8.Google Scholar

Pratt, J. (1961). ‘Review of Testing Statistical Hypotheses by E. L. Lehmann’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 56, 163–7.10.2307/2282344CrossRef Google Scholar

Pratt, J. (1965). ‘Bayesian Interpretation of Standard Inference Statements’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 27(2), 169–203.CrossRef Google Scholar

Pratt, J., Raiffa, H., and Schlaifer, R. (1995). Introduction to Statistical Decision Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Labs, Prusiner, University of California, press release, San Francisco (2004, July 30). Prion Finding Offers Insight into Spontaneous Protein Diseases. ScienceDaily.Google Scholar

Prusiner, S. (1982). ‘Novel Proteinaceous Infectious Particles Cause Scrapie’, Science 216(4542), 136–44.10.1126/science.6801762CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Prusiner, S. (1997). ‘Stanley B. Prusiner: Biographical’, Nobelprize.org, Nobel Media AB 2014, online November 21, 2017 (www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1997/prusiner-bio.html).Google Scholar

Prusiner, S. (2014). Madness and Memory: The Discovery of Prions: A New Biological Principle of Disease. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Ratliff, K. A. and Oishi, S. (2013). ‘Gender Differences in Implicit Self-Esteem Following a Romantic Partner’s Success or Failure’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 105(4), 688–702.10.1037/a0033769CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Reich, E. (2012). ‘Flaws Found in Faster than Light Neutrino Measurement: Two Possible Sources of Error Uncovered’, Nature online (2/22/2012).Google Scholar

Reid, C. (1998). Neyman. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar

Reid, N. (2003). ‘Could Fisher, Jeffreys and Neyman Have Agreed on Testing? Commentary on J. Berger’s Fisher Address’, Statistical Science 18, 27.Google Scholar

Reid, N. and Cox, D. (2015). ‘On Some Principles of Statistical Inference’, International Statistical Review 83(2), 293–308.CrossRef Google Scholar

Robert, C. (2007). The Bayesian Choice: From Decision-Theoretic Foundations to Computational Implementation. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Robert, C. (2011). ‘Discussion of “Is Bayes Posterior Just Quick and Dirty Confidence?” by D. A. S. Fraser’, Statistical Science 26(3), 317–18.10.1214/11-STS352ACrossRef Google Scholar

Robbins, H. (1956). ‘An Empirical Bayes’ Approach to Statistics’, in Proceedings Third Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Vol. 1, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pp. 157–64.Google Scholar

Rosenkrantz, R. (1977). Inference, Method and Decision: Towards a Bayesian Philosophy of Science. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel.10.1007/978-94-010-1237-9CrossRef Google Scholar

Rosenthal, R. and Gaito, J. (1963). ‘The Interpretation of Levels of Significance by Psychological Researchers’, Journal of Psychology 55(1), 33–8.Google Scholar

Rosenthal, R. and Rubin, D. (1994). ‘The Counternull Value of an Effect Size: A New Statistic’, Psychological Science 5(6), 329–34.10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00281.xCrossRef Google Scholar

Rothman, K. (1990). ‘No Adjustments Are Needed for Multiple Comparisons’, Epidemiology 1(1), 43–6.10.1097/00001648-199001000-00010CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Rothman, K., Lash, T., and Schachtman, N. (2013). Brief to United States Supreme Court of Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner. W. Scott Harkonen v. United States, No. 13–180, (9th Cir., filed September 4, 2013)Google Scholar

Royall, R. (1997). Statistical Evidence: A Likelihood Paradigm. Boca Raton. FL: Chapman and Hall, CRC Press.Google Scholar

Royall, R. (2004). ‘The Likelihood Paradigm for Statistical Evidence’ and ‘Rejoinder’, in Taper, M. and Lele, S. (eds.) The Nature of Scientific Evidence, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 119–138; 145–151.10.7208/chicago/9780226789583.003.0005CrossRef Google Scholar

Rubin, D. (1984). ‘Bayesianly Justifiable and Relevant Frequency Calculations for the Applied Statistician’, The Annals of Statistics 12(4), 1151–72.10.1214/aos/1176346785CrossRef Google Scholar

Salmon, W. (1966). The Foundations of Scientific Inference. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar

Salmon, W. (1988). ‘Dynamic Rationality: Propensity, Probability, and Credence’, in Fetzer, J. (ed.), Probability and Causality: Essays in Honor of Wesley C. Salmon, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel, pp. 3–40.CrossRef Google Scholar

Savage, L. J. (1954). The Foundations of Statistics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Savage, L. J. (1961). ‘The Foundations of Statistics Reconsidered’, Proceedings of the Fourth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability 1, Berkeley: University of California Press, 575–86.Google Scholar

Savage, L. J. (ed.) (1962). The Foundations of Statistical Inference: A Discussion. London: Methuen.Google Scholar

Savage, L. J. (1964). ‘The Foundations of Statistics Reconsidered,’ in Kyburg, H. E. and Smolker, H. (eds.), Studies in Subjective Probability, New York: Wiley, pp. 173–188. (Published originally 1961.)Google Scholar

Schnall, S., Benton, J., and Harvey, S. (2008). ‘With a Clean Conscience: Cleanliness Reduces the Severity of Moral Judgments’, Psychological Science 19(12), 1219–22.10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02227.xCrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Schweder, T. and Hjort, N. (2016). Confidence, Likelihood, Probability, Statistical Inference with Confidence Distributions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139046671CrossRef Google Scholar

Sebastiani, P., Solovieff, N., Puca, A., et al. (2010). ‘Genetic Signatures of Exceptional Longevity in Humans’, Science (epub. July 1, 2010). (Retracted: Science July 22, 2011, 333(6041), 404.)Google Scholar

Seidenfeld, T. (1979). ‘Why I Am Not an Objective Bayesian; Some Reflections Prompted by Rosenkrantz’, Theory and Decision 11(4), 413–40.10.1007/BF00139451CrossRef Google Scholar

Sellke, T., Bayarri, M., and Berger, J. (2001). ‘Calibration of ρ Values for Testing Precise Null Hypotheses’, The American Statistician 55(1), 62–71.10.1198/000313001300339950CrossRef Google Scholar

Selvin, H. (1970). ‘A Critique of Tests of Significance in Survey Research’ in Morrison, D. and Henkel, R. (eds.), pp. 94–106.Google Scholar

Senn, S. (1994a). ‘Testing for Baseline Balance in Clinical Trials’, Statistics in Medicine 13, 1715–26.10.1002/sim.4780131703CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Senn, S. (1994b). ‘Fisher’s Game with the Devil’, Statistics in Medicine 13(3), 217–30.10.1002/sim.4780130305CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Senn, S. (2001a). ‘Statistical Issues in Bioequivalence’, Statistics in Medicine 20(17–18), 2785–2799.10.1002/sim.743CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Senn, S. (2001b). ‘Two Cheers for P-values?’ Journal of Epidemiology and Biostatistics 6(2), 193–204.10.1080/135952201753172953CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Senn, S. (2002). ‘A Comment on Replication, P-values and Evidence’, S. N.Goodman, Statistics in Medicine 1992; 11:875-879’, Statistics in Medicine 21(16), 2437–44.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Senn, S. (2007). Statistical Issues in Drug Development, 2nd edn. Chichester, UK: Wiley Interscience.10.1002/9780470723586CrossRef Google Scholar

Senn, S. (2008). ‘Comment on an Article by Gelman’, Bayesian Analysis 3(3), 459–62.10.1214/08-BA318CCrossRef Google Scholar

Senn, S. (2011). ‘You May Believe You Are a Bayesian But You Are Probably Wrong’, Rationality, Markets and Morals (RMM) 2, 48–66.Google Scholar

Senn, S. (2013a). ‘Comment on Gelman and Shalizi’, British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 66, 65–7.10.1111/j.2044-8317.2012.02065.xCrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Senn, S. (2013b). ‘Seven Myths of Randomisation in Clinical Trials’, Statistics in Medicine 32(9), 1439–50.10.1002/sim.5713CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Senn, S. (2014). ‘Blood Simple? The Complicated and Controversial World of Bioequivalence’, Guest Blogpost on Errorstatistics.com (6/5/2014).Google Scholar

Senn, S. (2015a). ‘Double Jeopardy?: Judge Jeffreys Upholds the Law’, Guest Blogpost on Errorstatistics.com (5/9/2015).Google Scholar

Senn, S. (2015b). ‘Comment’ on Blogpost ‘Can You Change Your Bayesian Prior?’ on Errorstatistics.com (6/18/2015).Google Scholar

Senn, S. (2019). Statistical Issues in Drug Development, 3rd edn. Chichester, UK: Wiley Interscience.Google Scholar

Sewell, W. (1952). ‘Infant Training and the Personality of the Child’, American Journal of Sociology 58, 150–9.CrossRef Google Scholar

Shaffer, J. (1995). ‘Multiple Hypothesis-Testing’, Annual Review of Psychology 46(1), 561–84.10.1146/annurev.ps.46.020195.003021CrossRef Google Scholar

Silberstein, L. (1919). ‘Contribution to “Joint Eclipse Meeting of the Royal Society and the Royal Astronomical Society”’, The Observatory 42, 389–98.Google Scholar

Silver, N. (2017). ‘There Really Was a Liberal Media Bubble’, on FiveThirtyEight.com (3/10/2017).Google Scholar

Simmons, J., Nelson, L., and Simonsohn, U. (2011). ‘False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allow Presenting Anything as Significant’, Psychological Science 22(11), 1359–66.10.1177/0956797611417632CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Simmons, J., Nelson, L., and Simonsohn, U. (2012). ‘A 21 word solution’, Dialogue: The Official Newsletter of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology 26(2), 4–7.Google Scholar

Simonsohn, U. (2013). ‘Just Post It: The Lesson from Two Cases of Fabricated Data Detected by Statistics Alone’, Psychological Science 24(10), 1875–88.10.1177/0956797613480366CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L., and Simmons, J. (2014). ‘P-Curve: A Key to the File-Drawer’, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 143(2), 534–47.Google Scholar

Singh, K., Xie, M., and Strawderman, W. (2007). ‘Confidence Distribution (CD)– Distribution Estimator of a Parameter’, IMS Lecture Notes–Monograph Series, Volume 54, Complex Datasets and Inverse Problems: Tomography, Networks and Beyond, pp. 132–50.10.1214/074921707000000102CrossRef Google Scholar

Skyrms, B. (1986). Choice and Chance: An Introduction to Inductive Logic, 3rd edn. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar

Sober, E. (2001). ‘Venetian Sea Levels, British Bread Prices, and the Principle of the Common Cause’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52(2), 331–46.10.1093/bjps/52.2.331CrossRef Google Scholar

Sober, E. (2008). Evidence and Evolution: The Logic behind the Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511806285CrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (1986). Statistical Foundations of Econometric Modeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511599293CrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (1999). Probability Theory and Statistical Inference: Econometric Modeling with Observational Data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2000). ‘Revisiting Data Mining: “Hunting” with or without a License’, Journal of Economic Methodology 7(2), 231–64.10.1080/13501780050045119CrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2007). ‘Curve Fitting, the Reliability of Inductive Inference, and the Error‐Statistical Approach’, Philosophy of Science 74(5), 1046–66.10.1086/525643CrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2008a). ‘Review of S. T. Ziliak and D. N. McCloskey’s The Cult of Statistical Significance’, Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics 1(1), 154–64.Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2008b). ‘Statistics and Economics’, in Durlauf, S. and Blume, L. (eds.), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd edn., London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1057–97.Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2010a). ‘Akaike-type Criteria and the Reliability of Inference: Model Selection Versus Statistical Model Specification’, Journal of Econometrics 158(2), 204–20.10.1016/j.jeconom.2010.01.011CrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2010b). ‘Is Frequentist Testing Vulnerable to the Base-Rate Fallacy?’, Philosophy of Science 77(4), 565–83.10.1086/656009CrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2010c). ‘Theory Testing in Economics and the Error-Statistical Perspective’, in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 202–46.10.1017/CBO9780511657528.008CrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2010d). ‘Graphical Causal Modeling and Error Statistics: Exchanges with Clark Glymour’, in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), 364–75.Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2011a). ‘Revisiting the Welch Uniform Model: A Case for Conditional Inference?’, Advances and Applications in Statistical Science 5, 33–52.Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2011b). ‘Foundational Issues in Statistical Modeling: Statistical Model Specification and Validation’, Rationality, Markets and Morals (RMM) 2, 146–78.Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2012). ‘Revisiting the Berger Location Model: Fallacious Confidence Interval or a Rigged Example?’, Statistical Methodology, 9, 555–61.10.1016/j.stamet.2012.02.004CrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2013a). ‘R. A. Fisher: How an Outsider Revolutionized Statistics’, on Error Statistics blog (2/17/13). errorstatistics.com/2013/02/17/r-a-fisher-how-an-outsider-revolutionized-statistics/.Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2013b). ‘Who Should Be Afraid of the Jeffreys-Lindley Paradox?’, Philosophy of Science 80, 73–93.10.1086/668875CrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2013c). ‘A Frequentist Interpretation of Probability for Model-based Inductive Inference’, Synthese 190(9), 1555–85.10.1007/s11229-011-9892-xCrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. (2014). ‘Recurring Controversies about P values and Confidence Intervals Revisited’, Ecology 95(3), 645–51.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Spanos, A. (2019). Probability Theory and Statistical Inference: Empirical Modeling with Observational Data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781316882825CrossRef Google Scholar

Spanos, A. and Mayo, D. (2015). ‘Error Statistical Modeling and Inference: Where Methodology Meets Ontology’, Synthese 192(11), 3533–55.10.1007/s11229-015-0744-yCrossRef Google Scholar

Spiegelhalter, D. (2004). ‘Incorporating Bayesian Ideas into Health-Care Evaluation’, Statistical Science 19(1), 156–74.CrossRef Google Scholar

Spiegelhalter, D. (2012). ‘Explaining 5 Sigma for the Higgs: How Well Did They Do?’, Blogpost on Understandinguncertainty.org (8/7/2012).Google Scholar

Spiegelhalter, D., Freedman, L., and Parmar, M. (1994). ‘Bayesian Approaches to Randomized Trials’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 157(3), 357–416.10.2307/2983527CrossRef Google Scholar

Sprenger, J. (2011). ‘Science without (Parametric) Models: The Case of Bootstrap Resampling’, Synthese 180(1), 65–76.10.1007/s11229-009-9567-zCrossRef Google Scholar

Sprott, D. (2000). ‘Comments on the Paper by Lindley’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series D 49(3), 331–2.Google Scholar

Staley, K. (2014). An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Staly, K. (2017). ‘Pragmatic Warrant for Frequentist Statistical Practice: The Case of High Energy Physics’, Synthese 194(2),355–76Google Scholar

Staley, K. and Cobb, A. (2011). ‘Internalist and Externalist Aspects of Justification in Scientific Inquiry’, Synthese 182(3), 475–92.10.1007/s11229-010-9754-yCrossRef Google Scholar

Stapel, D. (2014). Faking Science: A True Story of Academic Fraud. Translated by Brown, N. from the original 2012 Dutch Ontsporing (Derailment), http://nick.brown.free.fr/stapel.Google Scholar

Steegen, S., Tuerlinckx, F., Gelman, A., and Vanpaemel, W. (2016). ‘Increasing Transparency Through a Multiverse Analysis’, Perspectives on Psychological Science 11(5), 702–12.10.1177/1745691616658637CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Stevens, S. (1946). ‘On the Theory of Scales of Measurement’, Science 103, 677–80.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Stigler, S. (2016). The Seven Pillars of Statistical Wisdom, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674970199CrossRef Google Scholar

Stone, M. (1997). ‘Discussion of Papers by Dempster and Aitkin’, Statistics and Computing 7, 263–4.CrossRef Google Scholar

Strassler, M. (2013a). ‘CMS Sees No Excess in Higgs Decays to Photons’, Blogpost on Of Particular Significance (profmattstrassler.com) (3/14/2013).Google Scholar

Strassler, M. (2013b). ‘A Second Higgs Particle’, Blogpost on Of Particular Significance (profmattstrassler.com) (7/2/2013).Google Scholar

Sugden, R. (2005). ‘Experiments as Exhibits and Experiments as Tests’, Journal of Economic Methodology 12(2), 291–302.10.1080/13501780500086248CrossRef Google Scholar

Suppes, P. (1969). ‘Models of Data’, in Studies in the Methodology and Foundations of Science, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel, pp. 24–35.10.1007/978-94-017-3173-7_2CrossRef Google Scholar

Talbott, W. (1991). ‘Two Principles of Bayesian Epistemology’, Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition 62(2), 135–50.10.1007/BF00419049CrossRef Google Scholar

Taleb, N. (2013). ‘Beware the Big Errors of “Big Data”’, WIRED/Opinion. Blogpost on Wired.com (2/8/2013).Google Scholar

Taleb, N. (2018). Skin in the Game: The Thrills and Logic of Risk Taking. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar

Thaler, R. H. (2013). ‘Breadwinning Wives and Nervous Husbands’, New York Times (June 2, 2013: 3(L)).Google Scholar

van Belle, G. (2008). Statistical Rules of Thumb, 2nd edn. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

Vigen, T. (2015). ‘Tangled Bedsheets & Consumption of Cheese’, in Spurious Correlations, New York: Hyperion (tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations).Google Scholar

von Mises, R. (1957). Probability, Statistics and Truth. New York: Dover.Google Scholar

Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2007). ‘A Practical Solution to the Pervasive Problems of P values’, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14(5), 779–804.10.3758/BF03194105CrossRef Google Scholar

Wagenmakers, E.-J. and Grünwald, P. (2006). ‘A Bayesian Perspective on Hypothesis Testing: A Comment on Killeen (2005)’, Psychological Science 17(7), 641–2.10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01757.xCrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Wagenmakers, E.-J., Wetzels, R., Borsboom, D., and van der Maas, H. (2011). ‘Why Psychologists Must Change the Way They Analyze Their Data: The Case of Psi: Comment on Bem (2011)’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 100, 426–32.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Wasserman, L. (2006). >‘Frequentist Bayes is Objective’, Bayesian Analysis, 1, 451–6.10.1214/06-BA116HCrossRef Google Scholar

Wasserman, L. (2007). ‘Why Isn’t Everyone a Bayesian?’, in Morris, C. and Tibshirani, R. (eds.), The Science of Bradley Efron, New York: Springer, pp. 260–1.Google Scholar

Wasserman, L. (2008). ‘Comment on an Article by Gelman’, Bayesian Analysis 3(3), 463–6.CrossRef Google Scholar

Wasserman, L. (2012a). ‘The Higgs Boson and the P-value Police’, Blogpost on normaldeviate.wordpress.com (7/11/2012).Google Scholar

Wasserman, L. (2012b). ‘What is Bayesian/Frequentist Inference?’, Blogpost on normaldeviate.wordpress.com (11/7/2012).Google Scholar

Wasserman, L. (2012c). ‘Nate Silver is a Frequentist: Review of “The Signal and the Noise”’, Blogpost on normaldeviate.wordpress.com (12/4/2012).Google Scholar

Wasserman, L. (2013). ‘The Value of Adding Randomness’, Blogpost on normaldeviate.wordpress.com (6/9/2013).Google Scholar

Wasserstein, R. and Lazar, N. (2016). ‘The ASA’s Statement on P-values: Context, Process and Purpose’, (and supplemental materials), The American Statistician 70(2), 129–33.CrossRef Google Scholar

Wellek, S. (2010). Testing Statistical Hypotheses of Equivalence and Noninferiority, 2nd edn. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall, CRC Press.10.1201/EBK1439808184CrossRef Google Scholar

Wertheimer, N. and Leeper, E. (1979). ‘Electrical Wiring Configurations and Childhood Cancer’, American Journal of Epidemiology 109, 273–84.10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112681CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Westfall, P. and Young, S. (1993). Resampling-Based Multiple Testing: Examples and Methods for P-Value Adjustment. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Wiki How to Do Anything (2017). ‘How to Get Out of Quicksand’ (wikihow.com/Get-out-of-Quicksand).Google Scholar

Wilks, S. (1938). ‘The Large-Sample Distribution of the Likelihood Ratio for Testing Composite Hypotheses’, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 9, 60–2.10.1214/aoms/1177732360CrossRef Google Scholar

Wilks, S. (1962). Mathematical Statistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Will, C. M. (1986). Was Einstein Right?: Putting General Relativity to the Test, 1st edn. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Will, C. M. (1993). Theory and Experiment in Gravitational Physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Williamson, J. (2010). In Defence of Objective Bayesianism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199228003.001.0001CrossRef Google Scholar

Wilson, R. A. (1971). Feminine Forever, 3rd edn. New York: Pocket Books. (First published 1968 by M. Evans & Company.)Google Scholar

Woodward, J. (2000). ‘Data, Phenomena, and Reliability’, Philosophy of Science 67, S163–S179.10.1086/392817CrossRef Google Scholar

Worrall, J. (1978). ‘Research Programmes, Empirical Support, and the Duhem Problem: Replies to Criticism’, in Radnitzky, G. and Andersson, G. (eds.), Progress and Rationality in Science, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel, pp. 321–38.Google Scholar

Worrall, J. (1989). ‘Fresnel, Poisson and the White Spot: The Role of Successful Predictions in the Acceptance of Scientific Theories’, in Gooding, D., Pinch, T. and Schaffer, S. (eds.), The Uses of Experiment: Studies in the Natural Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 135–57.Google Scholar

Worrall, J. (2002). ‘What Evidence in Evidence-Based Medicine?’, Philosophy of Science 69(S3), S316–S330.10.1086/341855CrossRef Google Scholar

Worrall, J. (2010). ‘Error, Tests, and Theory Confirmation’, in Mayo, D. and Spanos, A. (eds.), pp. 125–54.Google Scholar

Xie, M. and Singh, K. (2013). ‘Confidence Distribution, the Frequentist Distribution Estimator of a Parameter: A Review’, International Statistical Review 81(1), 3–39.CrossRef Google Scholar

Xu, F. and Garcia, V. (2008). ‘From the Cover: Intuitive Statistics by 8-month-old Infants’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105(13), 5012–15.CrossRef Google Scholar

Young, S. (2013). ‘Better P-values Through Randomization in Microarrays’, Guest Blogpost on Errorstatistics.com (6/19/2013).Google Scholar

Zabell, S. L. (1992). ‘R. A. Fisher and Fiducial Argument’, Statistical Science 7(3), 369–87.CrossRef Google Scholar

Ziliak, S. and McCloskey, D. (2008a). The Cult of Statistical Significance: How the Standard Error Costs Us Jobs, Justice, and Lives. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Ziliak, S. and McCloskey, D. (2008b). ‘Science is Judgment, Not Only Calculation: A Reply to Aris Spanos’s review of “The Cult of Statistical Significance”’, Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics 1(1), 165–70.10.23941/ejpe.v1i1.13CrossRef Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Book contents

References

Summary

Information

Access options

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

Accessibility Information

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive