Reply to Gelman, Gaudart, Pericchi: More Reasons to Revise Standards for Statistical Evidence

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America - United States
doi 10.1073/pnas.1400338111
Full Text
Abstract

Available in full text

Date
Authors
Publisher

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Related search

Zika, More Reasons for Concern

Pathogens and Global Health
Public HealthMicrobiologyEnvironmentalParasitologyMedicineInfectious DiseasesOccupational Health
2016English

Response to Azari and Gelman

Statistics and Public Policy
UncertaintyApplied MathematicsStatisticsProbabilityPublic Administration
2017English

Some Reasons to Revise the International Standard ISO 226:2003: Acoustics—Normal Equal-Loudness-Level Contours

Open Journal of Acoustics
2012English

Normative Reasons Are Not Good Bases: A Reply to Gregory

Philosophia (United States)
Philosophy
2018English

Unconvincing Statistical and Functional Inferences: Reply to Catmur

Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Mental HealthNeuropsychologyPhysiological PsychologyNeurologyBehavioral NeurosciencePsychiatryBiological Psychiatry
2014English

Reasons for Preventing Us to Get More Attractive: The Fear of Aesthetic Surgery

Humanities and Social Sciences
2016English

How to Revise a Research Paper

Software Testing Verification and Reliability
Media TechnologyRiskReliabilitySafetyQualitySoftware
2016English

Australia Urged to Revise Antarctic Efforts

Nature
Multidisciplinary
1997English

Сhristian Life Standards: Methanotropological Reasons

Visnik Nacional’nogo universitetu «Lvivska politehnika». Seria: Uridicni nauki
2018English

Amanote Research

Note-taking for researchers

Follow Amanote

© 2024 Amaplex Software S.P.R.L. All rights reserved.

Privacy PolicyRefund Policy