The Philosophy of Statistics
By D. Lindley. 2000
190 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: History and Philosophy of Science, Statistics and Probability
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b9a8b7c72e9e4b09e02fec24213556b1ed4bb149
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In History and Philosophy of Science
In Statistics and Probability
- J. R. Lockwood
- Daniel F McCaffrey
- L. Hamilton
- Håkan Nilsson
- Jason Matthew Aughenbaugh
- C. Paredis
- Jörg Rieskamp
- Eric-Jan Wagenmakers
Citations in the corpus
- Hierarchical Bayesian parameter estimation for cumulative prospect theory (2011, methodology): “Although hierarchical analyses can be carried out using orthodox methodology (i.e. Farrell & Ludwig, 2008; Hoffman & Rovine, 2007), there are philosophical and practical reasons to prefer the Bayesian methodology (e.g. Gelman & Hill, 2007; Lindley, 2000, respectively).”
- Evaluating Value-Added Models for Teacher Accountability. Monograph. (2004, background): “Second, estimates should be relatively invariant to different plausible estimation procedures or modeling choices; if estimates vary appreciably across models, the resulting uncertainty of findings should be considered (Lindley, 2000).”
- The Value of Using Imprecise Probabilities in Engineering Design (2006, background): “For more complete discussions of interpretations of probability, see for example [36, 41-44] .”