Uncategorized

Meeting 6 (June 25)

VI. (June 25) BONUS MEETING: Power, shpower, severity, positive predictive value (diagnostic model) & a Continuation of The Statistics Wars and Their Casualties

There will also be a guest speaker: Professor David Hand:
      “Trustworthiness of Statistical Analysis”

Reading:

SIST Excursion 5 Tour I (pp. 323-332; 338-344; 346-352),Tour II (pp. 353-6; 361-370), and Farewell Keepsake pp. 436-444

Recommended (if time) What Ever Happened to Bayesian Foundations (Excursion 6 Tour I)


Mayo Memos for Meeting 6:

-Souvenirs Meeting 6: W: The Severity Interpretation of Negative Results (SIN) for Test T+; X: Power and Severity Analysis; Z: Understanding Tribal Warfare

-JSM session I am part of on August 6: P-Values and “Statistical Significance”: Deconstructing the Arguments — Topic Contributed Panel

Nature paper just came out on which I’m a co-author: “Five Ways to Ensure Models Serve Society”

-SEV apps: Richard Morey. Newly updated Richard Morey SEV app.

-Selected blogposts on Power

  • 05/08/17: How to tell what’s true about power if you’re practicing within the error-statistical tribe
  • 12/12/17: How to avoid making mountains out of molehills (using power and severity)

Slides & Video Links for Meeting 6:

Slides: Mayo 2nd Draft slides for 25 June (not beautiful)

Video of Meeting #6: (Viewing Videos in full screen mode helps with buffering issues.)
VIDEO LINK:
https://wp.me/abBgTB-mZ

VIDEO LINK to David Hand’s Presentation: https://wp.me/abBgTB-mS
David Hand’s recorded Powerpoint slides: https://wp.me/abBgTB-n4
AUDIO LINK to David Hand’s Presentation & Discussion: https://wp.me/abBgTB-nm

Another link is here.

 

Meeting 5 (June 18)

.

V. (June 18) The Statistics Wars and Their Casualties

Reading:

SIST: Excursion 4 Tour III: pp. 267-286; Farewell Keepsake pp. 436-444

-Amrhein, V., Greenland, S., & McShane, B., (2019). Comment: Retire Statistical Significance, Nature, 567: 305-308.

-Ioannidis J. (2019). “The Importance of Predefined Rules and Prespecified Statistical Analyses: Do Not Abandon Significance.” JAMA. 321(21): 2067–2068. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.4582

-Mayo, DG. (2019), P‐value thresholds: Forfeit at your peril. Eur J Clin Invest, 49: e13170. doi: 10.1111/eci.13170

Recommended (and fun) P-values on Trial: Selective Reporting of (Best Practice Guides Against) Selective Reporting


Mayo Memos for Meeting 5:

-Souvenirs Meeting 5: S: Preregistration and Error ProbabilitiesT: Even Big Data Calls for Theory and FalsificationZ: Understanding Tribal Warfare

Bonus meeting: 25 June: See General Schedule

-Selected blogposts on Significance Test Wars from March 2019:

  • March 25, 2019: “Diary for Statistical War Correspondents on the Latest Ban on Speech.”
  • June 17, 2019: “The 2019 ASA Guide to P-values and Statistical Significance: Don’t Say What You Don’t Mean” (Some Recommendations)(ii)
  • July 19, 2019: The NEJM Issues New Guidelines on Statistical Reporting: Is the ASA P-Value Project Backfiring? (i)
  • November 4, 2019: On some Self-defeating aspects of the ASA’s 2019 recommendations of statistical significance tests
  • November 14, 2019: The ASA’s P-value Project: Why it’s Doing More Harm than Good (cont from 11/4/19)
  • November 30, 2019: P-Value Statements and Their Unintended(?) Consequences: The June 2019 ASA President’s Corner (b) 
  • December 13, 2019: “Les stats, c’est moi”: We take that step here! (Adopt our fav word of Phil Stat!) iii

-ASA 2016 Guide’s Six Principles (PDF)


Slides & Video Links for Meeting 5:

Slides: Draft Slides for 18 June (not beautiful)

Video Meeting 5: (Viewing in full screen mode helps with buffering issues.)
       VIDEO LINK: https://wp.me/abBgTB-n8

WORKSHOP

The Statistics Wars
and Their Casualties

19-20 June 2020 Delayed (a covid 19 casualty)

London School of Economics (CPNSS)

Alexander Bird (King’s College London), Mark Burgman (Imperial College London),
Daniele Fanelli (London School of Economics and Political Science),
Roman Frigg (London School of Economics and Political Science),
David Hand (Imperial College London), Christian Hennig (University of Bologna), Katrin Hohl (City University London), Daniël Lakens (Eindhoven University of Technology), Deborah Mayo (Virginia Tech), Richard Morey (Cardiff University),
Stephen Senn (Edinburgh, Scotland), Jon Williamson (University of Kent)*

While the field of statistics has a long history of passionate foundational controversy the last decade has, in many ways, been the most dramatic. Misuses of statistics, biasing selection effects, and high powered methods of Big-Data analysis, have helped to make it easy to find impressive-looking but spurious, results that fail to replicate. As the crisis of replication has spread beyond psychology and social sciences to biomedicine, genomics and other fields, people are getting serious about reforms.  Many are welcome (preregistration, transparency about data, eschewing mechanical uses of statistics); some are quite radical. The experts do not agree on how to restore scientific integrity, and these disagreements reflect philosophical battles–old and new– about the nature of inductive-statistical inference and the roles of probability in statistical inference and modeling. These philosophical issues simmer below the surface in competing views about the causes of problems and potential remedies. If statistical consumers are unaware of assumptions behind rival evidence-policy reforms, they cannot scrutinize the consequences that affect them (in personalized medicine, psychology, law, and so on). Critically reflecting on proposed reforms and changing standards requires insights from statisticians, philosophers of science, psychologists, journal editors, economists and practitioners from across the natural and social sciences. This workshop will bring together these interdisciplinary insights–from speakers as well as attendees.

Organizers: D. Mayo and R. Frigg

Logistician (chief logistics and contact person): Jean Miller 

*We expect one or more additional participants