IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rmm/journl/v2y2011i42.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

You May Believe You Are a Bayesian But You Are Probably Wrong

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Senn

    (University of Glasgow)

Abstract

An elementary sketch of some issues in statistical inference and in particular of the central role of likelihood is given. This is followed by brief outlines of what George Barnard considered were the four great systems of statistical inferences. These can be thought of terms of the four combinations of two factors at two levels. The first is fundamental purpose (decision or inference) and the second probability argument (direct or inverse). Of these four systems the 'fully Bayesiani approach of decision- making using inverse probability particularly associated with the Ramsay, De Finetti, Savage and Lindley has some claims to be the most impressive. It is claimed, however, and illustrated by example, that this approach seems to be impossible to follow. It is speculated that there may be some advantage to the practising statistician to follow George Barnardis advice of being familiar with all four systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Senn, 2011. "You May Believe You Are a Bayesian But You Are Probably Wrong," Rationality, Markets and Morals, Frankfurt School Verlag, Frankfurt School of Finance & Management, vol. 2(42), September.
    • Handle: RePEc:rmm:journl:v:2:y:2011:i:42
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rmm-journal.de/downloads/Article_Senn.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Talias, Michael A., 2007. "Optimal decision indices for R&D project evaluation in the pharmaceutical industry: Pearson index versus Gittins index," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(2), pages 1105-1112, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Deborah Mayo, 2012. "How Can We Cultivate Senn's Abilirty," Rationality, Markets and Morals, Frankfurt School Verlag, Frankfurt School of Finance & Management, vol. 3(51), February.
    2. repec:dau:papers:123456789/11069 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Glenn Shafer, 2021. "Testing by betting: A strategy for statistical and scientific communication," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(2), pages 407-431, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lean Yu & Shouyang Wang & Fenghua Wen & Kin Lai, 2012. "Genetic algorithm-based multi-criteria project portfolio selection," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 71-86, August.
    2. Malekipirbazari, Milad & Çavuş, Özlem, 2024. "Index policy for multiarmed bandit problem with dynamic risk measures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 312(2), pages 627-640.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rmm:journl:v:2:y:2011:i:42. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Friederike Pförtner (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hfbfide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.