Prologue: “Let Others Thrash it out!” A Brief History

  • Lemuel A. Moyé

Abstract

The Arabic doctor Avicenna in the eleventh century provided seven rules for medical experimentation involving human subjects [1]. Among these precepts was a recommendation for the use of control groups, the advice of repeating results (replication), and a warning against the use of variables that would confuse Avidenna’s decision about what variable is actually causing the effect of interest. These observations represented a great intellectual step forward; however, this step was taken in relative isolation. An additional six hundred years had to pass before the line of reasoning that led to p values eventually emerged. In order to understand the initial twists and turns of the development of this curious discipline, we need to take a quick diversion to life in Europe five hundred years ago.

Keywords

Eighteenth Century Industrial Revolution Eleventh Century Plot Yield Initial Twist 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Gehan, E. and Lemak, N.A., (1994) Statistics in Medical Research, Plenum Medical Book Company, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rempel, G., (Germany Lectures). Western New England College.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Luke 2:1, Holy Bible. (1978) New International Version. Zondervan Bible Publishers, Grand Rapids, MI.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kendall, Sir Maurice and Plackett, RL., (1977) Studies In the History of Statistics and Probability. Vol. 2, pp. 277–333, Macmillan Publishing, New York.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pearson, E.S., The History of Statistics in the 17th and 18th Centuries. Macmillan Publishing, New York.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Muhlberger, S., (1998) On Line Reference Book for Medieval Studies.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Owen, D. B., On the History of Probability and Statistics. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bacon, F., (1627) Sylva sylvarum, or a Natural History. William Rawley, London.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Young, A., (1771) A Course of Experimental Agriculture. J. Exshaw et al., Dublin.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Student“ 1908 ”The Probable Error of a Mean,“ Biometrika 6:1–24.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brownlee, K.A., (1965) Statistical Theory and Methodology in Science and Engineering, Second Edition, John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fisher, R. A., Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburg, UK.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fisher, R.A., (1933) “The Arrangement of Field Experiments,” Journal of the Ministry of Agriculture, September 503–513.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Todhunder, L.A., (1949) History of the Mathematical Theory of Probability. Else Publishing Company, New York.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Birnbaum, A., “On the Foundations of Statistical Inference,” Journal of the American Statistical Association 57: 269–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Berkson, J., (1942) “Experiences with tests of significance. A reply to RA. Fisher,” Journal of American Statistical Association 37: 242–246.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Berkson, J., (1942) “Test of significance considered as evidence,” Journal of the American Statistical Association 37: 335–345.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fisher, RA., (1942) “Response to Berkson,” Journal of the American Statistical Association 37: 103–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 219.
    Poole, C., (1987) “Beyond the confidence interval,” American Journal of Public Health. 77:195–199.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Poole, C., (1988) “Feelings and Frequencies: Two kinds of probability in public health research,” American Journal of Public Health 78: 1531–1533.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gardner, M.J., and Altman, D.G., (1986) “Confidence intervals rather than p values. Estimation rather than hypothesis testing,” British Medical Journal 292: 746–750.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fleiss, J.L., (1986) “Significance tests have a role in epidemiologic research; reactions to A.M. Walker. (Different Views),” American Journal of Public Health 76: 559–560.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fleiss, J.L. (1986) “Confidence intervals vs. significance tests: quantitative interpretation. (Letter),” American Journal of Public Health 76: 587–587.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fleiss, J.L., (1986) “Dr. Fleiss response (Letter),” American Journal of Public Health 76: 1033–1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Walker, A.M., (1986) “Reporting the results of epidemiologic studies,” American Journal of Public Health 76: 556–558.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Walker, A.M., (1986) “Significance tests [sic] represent consensus and standard practice (Letter)” American Journal of Public Health 76: 1033–1034.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Walker, A.M.,: Journal erratum 1986; 76:1087–1088.Google Scholar
  28. 27.
    Lang, J.M., Rothman, K.L., and Cann, C.L., (1998) “That confounded p value,” Epidemiology 9: 7–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lemuel A. Moyé
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Public HealthUniversity of TexasHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations