3 ms·
You can just shortcut all of that if you're a Bayesian and just plain say "p-values are posterior probabilities under a uniform (improper) prior" and save every
by jmalicki 7mo ago
You can just shortcut all of that if you're a Bayesian and just plain say "p-values are posterior probabilities under a uniform (improper) prior" and save everyone a lot of time.
And if you're doing that, don't care complain that p-values can be misinterpreted, because you're basically just laundering the misinterpretation of p-values.
Sure, you are mathematically pure because you made an initial assumption that it can be so, rather than being confused, but the end result is the same.
- kgwgk 7mo agoI have no interest in laundering the misinterpretation of p-values. I don’t know whose time is saved, frequentists don’t care about the Bayesian interpretation anyway and Bayesians don’t need to restrict themselves to a particular prior. The fact that in some cases you can choose one particular prior to get a numerical value for one probability that is equal to the numerical value for the probability of a completely different thing calculated by someone else doesn’t help anyone much. Bayesians can get the same result on their own if they want.