David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The interpretation of tests of a point null hypothesis against an unspecified alternative is a classical and yet unresolved issue in statistical methodology. This paper approaches the problem from the perspective of Lindley's Paradox: the divergence of Bayesian and frequentist inference in hypothesis tests with large sample size. I contend that the standard approaches in both frameworks fail to resolve the paradox. As an alternative, I suggest the Bayesian Reference Criterion: it targets the predictive performance of the null hypothesis in future experiments; it provides a proper decision-theoretic model for testing a point null hypothesis and it convincingly accounts for Lindley's Paradox
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Christian P. Robert (2014). On the Jeffreys-Lindley Paradox. Philosophy of Science 81 (2):216-232,.
Similar books and articles
Robert W. Frick (1998). Chow's Defense of Null-Hypothesis Testing: Too Traditional? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):199-199.
David Rindskopf (1998). Null-Hypothesis Tests Are Not Completely Stupid, but Bayesian Statistics Are Better. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):215-216.
Bruno D. Zumbo (1998). A Viable Alternative to Null-Hypothesis Testing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):227-228.
Jonathan J. Koehler (1997). A Farewell to Normative Null Hypothesis Testing in Base Rate Research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (4):780-782.
Edward Erwin (1998). The Logic of Null Hypothesis Testing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):197-198.
Adam S. Goodie (2004). Null Hypothesis Statistical Testing and the Balance Between Positive and Negative Approaches. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):338-339.
Henderikus J. Stam & Grant A. Pasay (1998). The Historical Case Against Null-Hypothesis Significance Testing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):219-220.
Jay Odenbaugh (2010). Philosophy of the Environmental Sciences. In P. D. Magnus & Jacob Busch (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Science. Palgrave Macmillan
George A. Morgan, Problems With Null Hypothesis Significance Testing (NHST): What Do the Textbooks Say?
Ronald N. Giere (1970). An Orthodox Statistical Resolution of the Paradox of Confirmation. Philosophy of Science 37 (3):354-362.
Günther Palm (1998). Significance Testing – Does It Need This Defence? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):214-215.
J. D. Trout (1999). Measured Realism and Statistical Inference: An Explanation for the Fast Progress of "Hard" Psychology. Philosophy of Science 66 (3):272.
Nimal Ratnesar & Jim Mackenzie (2006). The Quantitative-Qualitative Distinction and the Null Hypothesis Significance Testing Procedure. Journal of Philosophy of Education 40 (4):501–509.
Added to index2012-11-09
Total downloads21 ( #137,372 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #147,227 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?