Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The origin of the phrase "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is unclear, but Mark Twain attributed it to Benjamin Disraeli [1] "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a phrase describing the persuasive power of statistics to bolster weak arguments, "one of the best, and best-known" critiques of applied statistics. [2]
Bayesian statistics are based on a different philosophical approach for proof of inference.The mathematical formula for Bayes's theorem is: [|] = [|] [] []The formula is read as the probability of the parameter (or hypothesis =h, as used in the notation on axioms) “given” the data (or empirical observation), where the horizontal bar refers to "given".
Statistics, when used in a misleading fashion, can trick the casual observer into believing something other than what the data shows. That is, a misuse of statistics occurs when a statistical argument asserts a falsehood. In some cases, the misuse may be accidental. In others, it is purposeful and for the gain of the perpetrator.
Misuse of statistics can be both inadvertent and intentional, and the book How to Lie with Statistics, [72] by Darrell Huff, outlines a range of considerations. In an attempt to shed light on the use and misuse of statistics, reviews of statistical techniques used in particular fields are conducted (e.g. Warne, Lazo, Ramos, and Ritter (2012)).
Arthur P. Dempster at the Workshop on Theory of Belief Functions (Brest, 1 April 2010).. The theory of belief functions, also referred to as evidence theory or Dempster–Shafer theory (DST), is a general framework for reasoning with uncertainty, with understood connections to other frameworks such as probability, possibility and imprecise probability theories.
Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis, [1] although scientists also use evidence in other ways, such as when applying theories to practical problems. [2] Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretable in accordance with the scientific method.
Only evidence of that type is relevant to believing one of these conclusions. Therefore, there is no evidence for believing one among the rival conclusions. The first premise makes the claim that a theory is underdetermined. The second says that rational decision (i.e. using available evidence) depends upon insufficient evidence.
In short, it is a deviation from intention, expectation or desirability. [1] Logically, human actions can fail to achieve their goal in two different ways: the actions can go as planned, but the plan can be inadequate (leading to mistakes); or, the plan can be satisfactory, but the performance can be deficient (leading to slips and lapses ).