统计显著性的迷信
The cult of statistical significance
Stephen Thomas Ziliak、Deirdre N. McCloskey · 初版 2008 年
3人推荐
3位读者提及
6次提及
另一份来自推翻以 Fisherite statistical-significance 检验作为实验结果质量与重要性衡量标准的抗争报告。
Hacker News 上怎么说
正在加载完整评论……
The cult of statistical significance
Stephen Thomas Ziliak、Deirdre N. McCloskey · 初版 2008 年
另一份来自推翻以 Fisherite statistical-significance 检验作为实验结果质量与重要性衡量标准的抗争报告。
正在加载完整评论……
……作为一个统计学家，我深知 p 值会有哪些脱离事实的情况。你可以看看 Optimizely 是如何应对的（https://www.optimizely.com/statistics）。你也可以读读《统计显著性的崇拜》（The Cult of Statistical Significance，http://www.amazon.com/The-Cult-Statistical-Significance-Econ...）。《经济学人》的这个视频总结得很到位（http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/10/daily-c...）。缺失的核心要素是……
…a statistician, I have a keen awareness of the ways that p-values can depart from truth. You can see Optimizely's effort to cope (https://www.optimizely.com/statistics). You can read about it in The Cult of Statistical Significance (http://www.amazon.com/The-Cult-Statistical-Significance-Econ...). This Economist video captures it solidly (http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/10/daily-c...). The key component missing…
这个领域在《The Cult of Statistical Significance》里被喷得相当惨。书里给出的总结可谓一针见血、字字诛心：http://www.amazon.com/The-Cult-Statistical-Significance-Econ...
The field receives a pretty scathing review in The Cult of Statistical Significance. The summaries offered there are pretty damning: http://www.amazon.com/The-Cult-Statistical-Significance-Econ...
我刚读完一本关于这个话题的挺有意思的书：《The Cult Of Statistical Significance》：http://www.amazon.com/Cult-Statistical-Significance-Economic... 它基本上梳理了一大堆例子，主要是经济学领域的，但也有医学领域的（比如万络，Vioxx），在这些案例里统计显著性都……
I just finished a pretty interesting book on this topic: "The Cult Of Statistical Significance": http://www.amazon.com/Cult-Statistical-Significance-Economic... It basically goes through a bunch of examples, mostly in Economics, but in medicine also (Vioxx) where statistical significance has…
在其他领域关于这事儿也有大量的争论。Deirdre McCloskey 和 Stephen Ziliak 就专门就这个话题写了一篇文笔极佳的论文，题目正是《The Cult of Statistical Significance》。他们的核心观点是，脱离效应量（magnitudes）谈统计显著性毫无意义。[1] http://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/jsm.pdf
There has been plenty of debate about this in other fields as well. Deirdre McCloskey and Stephen Ziliak have a particularly well-written paper titled "The Cult of Statistical Significance" on this very topic. Their main point is that statistical significance is meaningless without a discussion of magnitudes. [1] http://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/jsm.pdf
对，你要是接着往下看博客，就会发现我可不止是有一点点贬低。我最近读了一本叫《The Cult of Statistical Significance》的书，它真的让我对 Fisher 彻底转黑了。我不仅觉得他的方法比贝叶斯分析逊色得多，而且他本人对那些贝叶斯派也是极其刻薄刻薄、冷嘲热讽。挺有意思的是，我的用户名……
Yes, if you read further on the blog, you'll see I'm more than slightly denigrating. I read a book recently called The Cult of Statistical Significance and it's really turned me against Fisher. Not only do I see his methods as sub-standard to Bayesian analysis, he was really mean and disparaging himself to those folks. It's interesting, my username…
我强烈建议任何想深入了解的人都去读读《The Cult of Statistical Significance》这本书，简直让人大开眼界。
I would highly recommend that anyone with further interest check out the book, "The Cult of Statistical Significance" It's eye opening.