Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Fisher, Neyman–Pearson and Jeffreys Views of Statistical Tests

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Significance Test Controversy Revisited

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Statistics ((BRIEFSSTATIST))

  • 1328 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter briefly reviews the rationale of the three main views of statistical tests. Current practice is based on the Fisher “test of significance” and the Neyman–Pearson “hypothesis test”. Jeffreys’ approach is a Bayesian alternative based on the use of “objective” prior probabilities of hypotheses. The main similarities and dissimilarities of these three approaches will be considered from a methodological point of view: what is the aim of statistical inference, what is the relevance of significance tests in experimental research? The dangers inherent in uncritical application of the Neyman–Pearson approach will also be stressed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bayes, T.: An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. Philos. Trans. 53, 370–418 (1763)

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, R.L., Hsu, J.C.: Bioequivalence trials, intersection-union tests and equivalence confidence sets (with comments). Stat. Sci. 11, 283–319 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, J.O.: Could Fisher, Jeffreys and Neyman have agreed on testing? Stat. Sci. 18, 1–32 (2003)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Broemeling, L., Broemeling, A.: Studies in the history of probability and statistics XLVIII: the Bayesian contributions of Ernest Lhoste. Biometrika 90, 728–731 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, W.G., Cox, G.M.: Experimental Designs, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York (1957)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Efron, B.: R.A. Fisher in the 21st century (with discussion). Stat. Sci. 13, 95–122 (1998)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R.A.: The logic of inductive inference (with discussion). J. R. Stat. Soc. A 98, 39–82 (1935)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R.A.: Mathematical probability in the natural sciences. Technometrics 1, 21–29 (1959)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R.A.: Statistical methods for research workers (reprinted 14th edition, 1970). In: Bennett, J.H. (ed.) Statistical Methods, Experimental Design, and Scientific Inference. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1990a)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R.A.: The design of experiments (reprinted 8th edition, 1966). In: Bennett, J.H. (ed.) Statistical Methods, Experimental Design, and Scientific Inference. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1990b)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R.A.: Statistical methods and scientific inference (reprinted 3rd edition, 1973). In: Bennett, J.H. (ed.) Statistical Methods, Experimental Design, and Scientific Inference. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1990c)

    Google Scholar 

  • Food and Drug Administration: Guidance for Industry: Statistical Approaches to Establishing Bioequivalence. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (2001). Available from http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/.../Guidances/ucm070244.pdf. Cited 13 March 2014

  • Ghosh, M.: Objective priors: an introduction for frequentists (with discussion). Stat. Sci. 26, 187–202 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbard, R.: Alphabet soup: blurring the distinctions between \(p\)’s and \(\alpha \)’s in psychological research. Theor. Psychol. 14, 295–327 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeffreys, H.: Theory of Probability (3rd edition, 1st edition 1939). Clarendon, Oxford (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffreys, H.: Scientific Inference (3rd edition, 1st edition 1931). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  • Laplace, P.S.: Essai Philosophique sur les Probabilités (6th edition) (English translation: A Philosophical Essay on Probability, Dover, New York, 1952). Bachelier, Paris (1840)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lecoutre, B., Derzko, G.: Asserting the smallness of effects in ANOVA. Methods Psychol. Res. 6, 1–32 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lecoutre, B., Lecoutre, M.-P., Poitevineau, J.: Killeen’s probability of replication and predictive probabilities: how to compute, use and interpret them. Psychol. Methods 15, 158–171 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lecoutre, B., Derzko, G.: Tester les nouveaux medicaments: les statisticiens et la réglementation. Stat. Soc. 2, 61–67 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, E.L.: The Fisher, Neyman-Pearson theories of testing hypotheses: one theory or two? J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 88, 1242–1249 (1993)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Lhoste, E.: Le calcul des probabilités appliqué à l’artillerie. Revue d’Artillerie, 91, 405–423 (mai), 516–532 (juin), 58–82 (juillet), 153–179 (août) (1923)

    Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J., Pearson, E.S.: On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference. Part I. Biometrika 20A, 175–240 (1928)

    Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J., Pearson, E.S.: On the problem of the most efficient tests of statistical hypotheses. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 231, 289–337 (1933a)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J., Pearson, E.S.: The testing of statistical hypotheses in relation to probabilities a priori. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 29, 492–510 (1933b)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J., Pearson, E.S.: Contributions to the theory of testing statistical hypotheses. Stat. Res. Mem. 1, 1–37 (1936a)

    Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J., Pearson, E.S.: Sufficient statistics and uniformly most powerful tests of statistical hypotheses. Stat. Res. Mem. 1, 113–137 (1936b)

    Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J.: L’estimation statistique traitée comme un problème classique de probabilité. Actual. Sci. Indust. 739, 25–57 (1938)

    Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J.: Foundations of the general theory of estimation. Actual. Sci. Indust. 1146, 83–95 (1951)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J.: Lectures and Conferences on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, 2nd edn. Graduate School U.S, Department of Agriculture, Washington (1952)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J.: “Inductive behavior” as a basic concept of philosophy of science. Rev. Inst. Int. Stat. 25, 7–22 (1957)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J.: Frequentist probability and frequentist statistics. Synthese 36, 97–131 (1977)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Perlman, M.D., Wu, L.: The emperor’s new tests. Stat. Sci. 14, 355–369 (1999)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenkrantz, R.D.: The significance test controversy. Synthese 26, 304–321 (1973)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rozeboom, W.W.: The fallacy of the null hypothesis significance test. Psychol. Bull. 57, 416–428 (1960)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schervish, M.J.: Theory of statistics. Springer, New York (1995)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Schuirmann, D.J.: A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. J. Pharmacokinet. Biop. 15, 657–680 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selwyn, W.J., Hall, N.R., Dempster, A.P.: Letter to the editor. Biometrics 41, 561 (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates, F.: Sir Ronald Fisher and the design of experiments. Biometrics 20, 307–321 (1964)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zabell, S.L.: R. A. Fisher and the fiducial argument. Stat. Sci. 7, 369–387 (1992)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ERIS, Laboratoire de Mathématiques Raphaël Salem, UMR 6085, CNRS Université de Rouen, Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray, France

    Bruno Lecoutre

  2. ERIS, IJLRA UMR-7190, CNRS, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France

    Jacques Poitevineau

Authors
  1. Bruno Lecoutre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jacques Poitevineau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bruno Lecoutre .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lecoutre, B., Poitevineau, J. (2014). The Fisher, Neyman–Pearson and Jeffreys Views of Statistical Tests. In: The Significance Test Controversy Revisited. SpringerBriefs in Statistics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44046-9_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation