It is time to stop teaching frequentism to non-statisticians (2012)

Re:It is time to stop teaching frequentism to non-statistici... by marcosdumay on Thursday August 04, 2022 @12:17PM (#32344870)

Hum... You are basically equating frequentism with the null ritual. The article itself is basically equating frequentism with the null ritual.

Ok, that explains why people bother spend so much energy badmouthing frequentism, but it's a very bad framing anyway, bothering a lie. Frequentism is not the null ritual. In fact, it's almost completely compatible with bayesianism, the one large difference being the freedom to set priors before doing your analysis.

If the article was titled "It's time to stop teaching the null ritual to scientists", nobody would even disagree.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:It is time to stop teaching frequentism to non-statistici... by zozbot234 on Thursday August 04, 2022 @12:44PM (#32345227)

> Frequentism is not the null ritual. In fact, it's almost completely compatible with bayesianism, the one large difference being the freedom to set priors before doing your analysis.

This may be true of "frequentism" in a strict sense, but many statistical methods in common use that are often described as such (including, arguably, NHST) are not consistent with reasonable versions of the likelihood principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likelihood_principle . In a sense, one might feasibly argue that these methods are not even properly frequentist.

[ Parent | on HN ]