2 ms·
Indeed, when I took my introductory statistics courses at UC Berkeley (STAT 200A and STAT 200B), we discussed the pitfalls of blindly applying these concepts---
by mavam 10y ago
Indeed, when I took my introductory statistics courses at UC Berkeley (STAT 200A and STAT 200B), we discussed the pitfalls of blindly applying these concepts---albeit at very high level.
Initially, I wrote this cookbook/cheatsheet in order to structure and retain the material in these courses, not to challenge them. Most of the content comes from the cited references, all of which have a very terse and mathematical presentation. It would be great to augment the current document with pointers to the literature that offer a critical discussion. As a non-statistician, I lack the historical perspective, but I always appreciate contributions from experts in the field. (The document is open-source: https://github.com/mavam/stat-cookbook https://github.com/mavam/stat-cookbook)
- nonbel 10y agoI don't have time to contribute but the wikipedia page on NHST[1] used to be pretty good about refs. A lot of the stuff pointing at controversy/history has been slowly removed the last few years... it still isn't too bad though. Anyone interested can also try looking through old versions. There have been thousands of papers published on that topic. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_hypothesis_testing#Origins_and_early_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_hypothesis_testing...