0:00 Introduction: why stat. tests, hypothesis 3:54 History of Frequentist Statistics (Fisher vs. Neyman-Pearson) 6:18 Example for Fisher NHST and Critique 10:09 A P-roblem: p values in high profile criminal cases 18:15 The Bayes Factor 27:11 Taxonomy for Interpreting Bayes Factor 34:43 Comparison (side by side) NHST and Bayes Example 1: Correlation Analysis 41:22 With Frequentist Approach 48:50 With Bayesian Statistics 58:00 Statistical Software for Bayes Example 2: t test 1:07:28 With Frequentist Approach 1:09:12 With Bayesian Statistics 1:12:46 Take Home Points
Isn’t the Bayes Factor the same as Relative Risk and, as in the presentation, it depends on the experiment, that is, not the mathematics. That is the philosophical deference between Bayes and frequentist, as you say. Oddly, some frequentist point to 2:1 on RR or odds ratio and that is usually what you need to have epidemiology entered into evidence in a court of law.
0:00 Introduction: why stat. tests, hypothesis
3:54 History of Frequentist Statistics (Fisher vs. Neyman-Pearson)
6:18 Example for Fisher NHST and Critique
10:09 A P-roblem: p values in high profile criminal cases
18:15 The Bayes Factor
27:11 Taxonomy for Interpreting Bayes Factor
34:43 Comparison (side by side) NHST and Bayes
Example 1: Correlation Analysis
41:22 With Frequentist Approach
48:50 With Bayesian Statistics
58:00 Statistical Software for Bayes
Example 2: t test
1:07:28 With Frequentist Approach
1:09:12 With Bayesian Statistics
1:12:46 Take Home Points
Time stamp god
Isn’t the Bayes Factor the same as Relative Risk and, as in the presentation, it depends on the experiment, that is, not the mathematics. That is the philosophical deference between Bayes and frequentist, as you say. Oddly, some frequentist point to 2:1 on RR or odds ratio and that is usually what you need to have epidemiology entered into evidence in a court of law.