DOCSLIB.ORG

Rothamsted in the Making of Sir Ronald Fisher Scd FRS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rothamsted in the Making of Sir Ronald Fisher Scd FRS Rothamsted in the Making of Sir Ronald Fisher ScD FRS John Aldrich University of Southampton RSS September 2019 1 Finish 1962 “the most famous statistician and mathematical biologist in the world” dies Start 1919 29 year-old Cambridge BA in maths with no prospects takes temporary job at Rothamsted Experimental Station In between 1919-33 at Rothamsted he makes a career for himself by creating a career 2 Rothamsted helped make Fisher by establishing and elevating the office of agricultural statistician—a position in which Fisher was unsurpassed by letting him do other things—including mathematical statistics, genetics and eugenics 3 Before Fisher … (9 slides) The problems were already there viz. o the relationship between harvest and weather o design of experimental trials and the analysis of their results Leading figures in agricultural science believed the problems could be treated statistically 4 Established in 1843 by Lawes and Gilbert to investigate the effective- ness of fertilisers Sir John Bennet Lawes Sir Joseph Henry Gilbert (1814-1900) land-owner, fertiliser (1817-1901) professional magnate and amateur scientist scientist (chemist) In 1902 tired Rothamsted gets make-over when Daniel Hall becomes Director— public money feeds growth 5 Crops and weather and experimental trials Crops & the weather o examined by agriculturalists—e.g. Lawes & Gilbert 1880 o subsequently treated more by meteorologists Experimental trials a hotter topic o treated in Journal of Agricultural Science o by leading figures Wood of Cambridge and Hall of Rothamsted o using techniques from the theory of errors 6 1880 Lawes and Gilbert calculate averages and make informal inferences from them 7 The agricultural statistics of the RSS was the statistics of the agricultural economy Statistics and meteorology were hobbies for Hooker (1867-1944) —day job in Board of Agriculture Hooker worked with Yule a student of Pearson who became a presence in agricultural statistics like another Pearson student, Gosset 8 Least squares meets trials 1910 Cambridge Thomas Wood (1869-1929) Cambridge professor of agriculture collaborates with least squares expert, astronomer Frederick Stratton. In 1912 the Cambridge School of Agriculture appoints Yule to a position in statistics Least squares meets trials in the JAS 1911 Rothamsted Daniel Hall (1864-1942) Director of Rothamsted and self-taught in error theory Hops linked Hall the cultivator to Student (W S Gosset) the customer Gosset of Guinness William Sealy Gosset (1876-1937) o self-taught and then goes to learn from Karl Pearson o Interested in statistics for brewing & in stats for agriculture 11 By 1914 scene is set Leading agriculturalists are doing statistics The leading journal JAS publishes them A half-move is made towards internalizing statistics in agricultural science with Cambridge appointing Yule to a lectureship in statistics—a lectureship shared between agriculture and economics War stops everything 12 Fisher—war over, looks for work In 1914 Fisher (born 1890) volunteers but unfit for military service teaches maths and physics at public schools including Bradfield College 1917-9. yet active in genetics, statistical theory and eugenics, publishing major works 1919 Offer I: Karl Pearson at the Galton For accepting • The Galton Lab at UC was the only place that did Fisher stuff—genetics, statistical theory and eugenics • Senior Assistant was a proper job Against • It did not do Fisher stuffthe right way • Fisher would have to follow orders “If you are refusing”—Major Darwin Leonard Darwin (1850-1943) Fisher’s friend and benefactor, son of Charles, President of Eugenics Education Society • Appraises the offer from the viewpoint of the eugenic cause • the offer might lead to Pearson’s job • A really important job but all kinds of obstacles … 15 Offer II: John Russell of Rothamsted • Russell, an agricultural chemist, succeeded Hall as Director in 1911 • The valuable data had been accumulating since 1858 • Rothamsted was expanding –the scientific staff grew from 9 in 1912 to 29 in 1920 Darwin “a little sad” but he needn’t have worried … Fisher wrote around 200 pieces while at Rothamsted 100 on Genetics, Evolution and Eugenics 100 on Statistical and Mathematical Theory and Applications 20 on Rothamsted applications or 10% of the total 16 published between 1922 and 29 17 The Russell-Fisher arrangement Russell recalled years later I was not going to limit Fisher’s investigations, because I was certain that, whether they were concerned with our data or not, the science he was building up would be of the greatest help to us later on. But High Authority did not take this view, and I got a personal letter urging me to change the programme. This I was not prepared to do: fortunately the matter dropped before it reached the official stage. Russell let heads of departments do their own thing and Fisher was special—he was a genius So Fisher went on doing mathematical statistics genetics and eugenics 18 Russell proclaims a Statistical Laboratory One of “four great divisions” From the start Russell tries to explain what it was for and what its findings mean He was proud that Rothamsted had taken the lead in establishing such 1921 First instalment of weather and crops project involved time series analysis using orthogonal polynomials—worlds away from pre-war work Russell brought Fisher’s highly technical innovations to a general agricultural science audience Plant Nutrition and Crop Production (1926: 33-6) -- 20 1923 Like Studies I and unlike the earlier work of Stratton and Yule no agricultural scientist in the lead Studies II changed direction away from time series analysis to comparison of trial Pre-war work had involved pairwise comparisons of manurial treatments or of varieties. Fisher was showing how to do combined analysis. Introduced the analysis of variance—the multiplicative model subsequently dropped 21 “Close scrutiny of the Statistical Department” Report published in 1925 alludes to advances in the treatment of observations (analysis of variance) and in the planning of experiments (randomisation and Latin squares) describes a new dispensation where the Statistical Department is king Statistical Methods 1925 “working in somewhat intimate co- operation with a number of biological research departments” “to put into the hands of research workers, and especially of biologists, the means of applying statistical tests accurately to the numerical data accumulated in their own laboratories or available in the literature” Further Applications of the Analysis of Variance concludes with “the principles Book and sales both grew underlying modern methods of arranging . 1st edition (1925) 239 pages sold 1050 copies field experiments” . 2nd (1928) of 269 sold 1250 . 3rd (1930) of 283 sold 1500 . 4th (1932) of 307 sold 1500 23 Explaining design to farmers 1926 The Journal communicated the ideas and results of agricultural researchers to farmers. Rothamsted contributed often 24 The statistics machine: assistants & voluntary workers learnt from Fisher, published with him and imitated him Fisher always had an assistant or two: Winifred Mackenzie, Oscar Irwin, John Wishart and Frank Yates (Margaret Webster left before she published anything) Describes 50 odd pieces by Mackenzie was taught by Fisher, 4 assistants and 30 Bowley, Irwin and Wishart by voluntary workers Pearson and Yates wasn’t taught statistics Fisher had joint publications with 6 but stimulated All came without knowledge of everybody Fisher’s methods Prepping an assistant—Frank Yates 1931 Yates was a geodesist, expert on least squares but had to learn Fisher’s take on statistics By 1931 Fisher could give him a reading list … 26 They went on working for Fisher even after parting Henry Daniels recalled L H. C Tippett was an Wishart replaced Yule at industrial statistician Cambridge He was sent to learn statistics Taught Fisher’s stats to first from Pearson and then mathematics students from Fisher including Anscombe, Bartlett, Published 2 papers with each Cochran, Daniels, Finney, Hartley, Kempthorne, Lawley Methods went through 4 and Stevens editions—last in 1952. Canonising Fisher at the RSS o The Industrial and Research Section brought Rothamsted statistics into RSS statistics o Wishart was a prime mover in the I&A—not Fisher o But the subject was Fisher’s o (Prof Fisher as he had left Rothamsted for UC) Yates: looking after Rothamsted and then some … From Fisher’s departure to mid 60s Fisher stayed close to Rothamsted while he was at UC, moving away in 1943 when he became prof at Cambridge Back to 1929: Fisher is FRS Rothamsted connections provide roughly half of Fisher’s backing 30 Life after R—as imagined to Darwin in 1929 Pearson’s chair at UC A new chair at LSE 31 Russell to Fisher July 1933 Leaving Rothamsted “you have made such wonderful advances since first you came to Rothamsted” “adding lustre and dignity to Rothamsted itself” “this place where you found & began to open up those fields which since yielded such rich harvests & promise even greater ones” 32 Life after R—first impressions of reality Getting Pearson’s chair 1933 Punnet’s genetics chair 1943 33 How Rothamsted helped i) Creating and elevating the position of agricultural statistician o The time was ripe—as it had been for biometry 20 years earlier and for medical statistics 10 years earlier o Fisher played the part brilliantly o Russell took a chance and backed it with noisy PR 34 How Rothamsted helped ii) Giving Fisher the ‘leisure’ do other things— including mathematical statistics, genetics and eugenics o Rothamsted had nothing against the content of what Fisher might do, unlike Pearson o The achievement would reflect well on Rothamsted 35 36 Notes The correspondence is from the University of Adelaide Fisher Archive. Some of the letters are online at https://www.adelaide.edu.au/library/special/mss/fisher/correspondence.html The Rothamsted reports are available online at http://www.era.rothamsted.ac.uk/eradoc/books/1 The present story is a footnote to Joan Fisher Box (1978) R.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Basic Statistics
    Statistics Kristof Reid Assistant Professor Medical University of South Carolina Core Curriculum V5 Financial Disclosures • None Core Curriculum V5 Further Disclosures • I am not a statistician • I do like making clinical decisions based on appropriately interpreted data Core Curriculum V5 Learning Objectives • Understand why knowing statistics is important • Understand the basic principles and statistical test • Understand common statistical errors in the medical literature Core Curriculum V5 Why should I care? Indications for statistics Core Curriculum V5 47% unable to determine study design 31% did not understand p values 38% did not understand sensitivity and specificity 83% could not use odds ratios Araoye et al, JBJS 2020;102(5):e19 Core Curriculum V5 50% (or more!) of clinical research publications have at least one statistical error Thiese et al, Journal of thoracic disease, 2016-08, Vol.8 (8), p.E726-E730 Core Curriculum V5 17% of conclusions not justified by results 39% of studies used the wrong analysis Parsons et al, J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93-B(9):1154-1159. Core Curriculum V5 Are these two columns different? Column A Column B You have been asked by your insurance carrier 19 10 12 11 to prove that your total hip patient outcomes 10 9 20 19 are not statistically different than your competitor 10 17 14 10 next door. 21 19 24 13 Column A is the patient reported score for you 12 18 and column B for your competitor 17 8 12 17 17 10 9 9 How would you prove you are 24 10 21 9 18 18 different or better? 13 4 18 8 12 14 15 15 14 17 Core Curriculum V5 Are they still the same? Column A: Mean=15 Column B: Mean=12 SD=4 Core Curriculum V5 We want to know if we're making a difference Core Curriculum V5 What is statistics? a.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of the Design and Analysis of Experiments
    A FRESH LOOK AT THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF THE DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTS F. YATES ROTHAMSTED EXPERIMENTAL STATION, HARPENDEN 1. Introduction When Professor Neyman invited me to attend the Fifth Berkeley Symposium, and give a paper on the basic principles of the design and analysis of experiments, I was a little hesitant. I felt certain that all those here must be thoroughly conversant with these basic principles, and that to mull over them again would be of little interest. This, however, is the first symposium to be held since Sir Ronald Fisher's death, and it does therefore seem apposite that a paper discussing some aspect of his work should be given. If so, what could be better than the design and analysis of experiments, which in its modern form he created? I do not propose today to give a history of the development of the subject. This I did in a paper presented in 1963 to the Seventh International Biometrics Congress [14]. Instead I want to take a fresh look at the logical principles Fisher laid down, and the action that flows from them; also briefly to consider certain modern trends, and see how far they are really of value. 2. General principles Fisher, in his first formal exposition of experimental design [4] laid down three basic principles: replication; randomization; local control. Replication and local control (for example, arrangement in blocks or rows and columns of a square) were not new, but the idea of assigning the treatments at random (subject to the restrictions imposed by the local control) was novel, and proved to be a most fruitful contribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes: Hypothesis Testing, Fisher's Exact Test
    Notes: Hypothesis Testing, Fisher’s Exact Test CS 3130 / ECE 3530: Probability and Statistics for Engineers Novermber 25, 2014 The Lady Tasting Tea Many of the modern principles used today for designing experiments and testing hypotheses were intro- duced by Ronald A. Fisher in his 1935 book The Design of Experiments. As the story goes, he came up with these ideas at a party where a woman claimed to be able to tell if a tea was prepared with milk added to the cup first or with milk added after the tea was poured. Fisher designed an experiment where the lady was presented with 8 cups of tea, 4 with milk first, 4 with tea first, in random order. She then tasted each cup and reported which four she thought had milk added first. Now the question Fisher asked is, “how do we test whether she really is skilled at this or if she’s just guessing?” To do this, Fisher introduced the idea of a null hypothesis, which can be thought of as a “default position” or “the status quo” where nothing very interesting is happening. In the lady tasting tea experiment, the null hypothesis was that the lady could not really tell the difference between teas, and she is just guessing. Now, the idea of hypothesis testing is to attempt to disprove or reject the null hypothesis, or more accurately, to see how much the data collected in the experiment provides evidence that the null hypothesis is false. The idea is to assume the null hypothesis is true, i.e., that the lady is just guessing.
    [Show full text]
  • From P-Value to FDR
    From P-value To FDR Jie Yang, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Family, Population and Preventive Medicine Director Biostatistical Consulting Core In collaboration with Clinical Translational Science Center (CTSC) and the Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Shared Resource (BB-SR), Stony Brook Cancer Center (SBCC). OUTLINE P-values - What is p-value? - How important is a p-value? - Misinterpretation of p-values Multiple Testing Adjustment - Why, How, When? - Bonferroni: What and How? - FDR: What and How? STATISTICAL MODELS Statistical model is a mathematical representation of data variability, ideally catching all sources of such variability. All methods of statistical inference have assumptions about • How data were collected • How data were analyzed • How the analysis results were selected for presentation Assumptions are often simple to express mathematically, but difficult to satisfy and verify in practice. Hypothesis test is the predominant approach to statistical inference on effect sizes which describe the magnitude of a quantitative relationship between variables (such as standardized differences in means, odds ratios, correlations etc). BASIC STEPS IN HYPOTHESIS TEST 1. State null (H0) and alternative (H1) hypotheses 2. Choose a significance level, α (usually 0.05) 3. Based on the sample, calculate the test statistic and calculate p-value based on a theoretical distribution of the test statistic 4. Compare p-value with the significance level α 5. Make a decision, and state the conclusion HISTORY OF P-VALUES P-values have been in use for nearly a century. The p-value was first formally introduced by Karl Pearson, in his Pearson's chi-squared test and popularized by Ronald Fisher.
    [Show full text]
  • In Pursuit of a Science of Agriculture: the Role of Statistics in Field Experiments
    Giuditta Parolini In pursuit of a science of agriculture: the role of statistics in field experiments Article, Postprint version This version is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.14279/depositonce-6754. Suggested Citation Parolini, Giuditta: In pursuit of a science of agriculture: the role of statistics in field experiments. - In: History and philosophy of the life sciences. - ISSN: 1742-6316 (online), 0391-9714 (print). - 37 (2015), 3. - pp. 261–281. - DOI: 10.1007/s40656-015-0075-9. (Postprint is cited, page numbers differ.) This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in History and philosophy of the life sciences. The final authenticated version is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40656-015-0075-9. Terms of Use Copyright applies. A non-exclusive, non-transferable and limited right to use is granted. This document is intended solely for personal, non-commercial use. Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) In Pursuit of a Science of Agriculture: The Role of Statistics in Field Experiments In Pursuit of a Science of Agriculture: The Role of Statistics in Field Experiments Giuditta Parolini Postdoctoral fellow, Technische Universität Berlin and Berliner Zentrum für Wissensgeschichte Introduction “I do not always agree with Sir Ronald Fisher, but it is due to him that the standard of presentation of results in agriculture is better than in any of the so-called exact sciences; and this is a state of affairs that physicists should cease to tolerate” (Jeffreys 1953: 119). In this way, Harold Jeffreys, geophysicist and statistician, concluded his address to Section A (Physics and Mathematics) of the British Association for the Advancement of Science.
    [Show full text]
  • (P>0.05): Significance Thresholds and the Crisis of Unreplicable Research
    A peer-reviewed version of this preprint was published in PeerJ on 7 July 2017. View the peer-reviewed version (peerj.com/articles/3544), which is the preferred citable publication unless you specifically need to cite this preprint. Amrhein V, Korner-Nievergelt F, Roth T. 2017. The earth is flat (p > 0.05): significance thresholds and the crisis of unreplicable research. PeerJ 5:e3544 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3544 The earth is flat (p>0.05): Significance thresholds and the crisis of unreplicable research Valentin Amrhein1,2,3, Fränzi Korner-Nievergelt3,4, Tobias Roth1,2 1Zoological Institute, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland 2Research Station Petite Camargue Alsacienne, Saint-Louis, France 3Swiss Ornithological Institute, Sempach, Switzerland 4Oikostat GmbH, Ettiswil, Switzerland Email address: [email protected] Abstract The widespread use of 'statistical significance' as a license for making a claim of a scientific finding leads to considerable distortion of the scientific process (according to the American Statistical Association). We review why degrading p-values into 'significant' and 'nonsignificant' contributes to making studies irreproducible, or to making them seem irreproducible. A major problem is that we tend to take small p-values at face value, but mistrust results with larger p-values. In either case, p-values tell little about reliability of research, because they are hardly replicable even if an alternative hypothesis is true. Also significance (p≤0.05) is hardly replicable: at a good statistical power of 80%, two studies will be 'conflicting', meaning that one is significant and the other is not, in one third of the cases if there is a true effect.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantifying Certainty: the P-Value
    Ursinus College Digital Commons @ Ursinus College Transforming Instruction in Undergraduate Statistics and Probability Mathematics via Primary Historical Sources (TRIUMPHS) Fall 2017 Quantifying Certainty: the p-value Dominic Klyve Central Washington University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/triumphs_statistics Part of the Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Educational Methods Commons, Higher Education Commons, Science and Mathematics Education Commons, and the Statistics and Probability Commons Click here to let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Klyve, Dominic, "Quantifying Certainty: the p-value" (2017). Statistics and Probability. 1. https://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/triumphs_statistics/1 This Course Materials is brought to you for free and open access by the Transforming Instruction in Undergraduate Mathematics via Primary Historical Sources (TRIUMPHS) at Digital Commons @ Ursinus College. It has been accepted for inclusion in Statistics and Probability by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Ursinus College. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Quantifying Certainty: the p-value Dominic Klyve∗ July 16, 2019 1 Introduction One of the most important ideas in an introductory class in statistics is that of the p-value. These p-values help us understand how unlikely an outcome is, given an assumption (called a null hypothesis) about how the world works. While the formal theory of p-values arose in the twentieth century [Pearson, 1900, Fisher, 1925], similar ideas had been around for centuries, and a study of these older ideas can give us insight and understanding into the modern theory of statistics. This project has three main parts.
    [Show full text]
  • How Ronald Fisher Became a Mathematical Statistician Comment Ronald Fisher Devint Statisticien
    Mathématiques et sciences humaines Mathematics and social sciences 176 | Hiver 2006 Varia How Ronald Fisher became a mathematical statistician Comment Ronald Fisher devint statisticien Stephen Stigler Édition électronique URL : http://journals.openedition.org/msh/3631 DOI : 10.4000/msh.3631 ISSN : 1950-6821 Éditeur Centre d’analyse et de mathématique sociales de l’EHESS Édition imprimée Date de publication : 1 décembre 2006 Pagination : 23-30 ISSN : 0987-6936 Référence électronique Stephen Stigler, « How Ronald Fisher became a mathematical statistician », Mathématiques et sciences humaines [En ligne], 176 | Hiver 2006, mis en ligne le 28 juillet 2006, consulté le 23 juillet 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/msh/3631 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/msh.3631 © École des hautes études en sciences sociales Math. Sci. hum ~ Mathematics and Social Sciences (44e année, n° 176, 2006(4), p. 23-30) HOW RONALD FISHER BECAME A MATHEMATICAL STATISTICIAN Stephen M. STIGLER1 RÉSUMÉ – Comment Ronald Fisher devint statisticien En hommage à Bernard Bru, cet article rend compte de l’influence décisive qu’a eu Karl Pearson sur Ronald Fisher. Fisher ayant soumis un bref article rédigé de façon hâtive et insuffisamment réfléchie, Pearson lui fit réponse éditoriale d’une grande finesse qui arriva à point nommé. MOTS-CLÉS – Exhaustivité, Inférence fiduciaire, Maximum de vraisemblance, Paramètre SUMMARY – In hommage to Bernard Bru, the story is told of the crucial influence Karl Pearson had on Ronald Fisher through a timely and perceptive editorial reply to a hasty and insufficiently considered short submission by Fisher. KEY-WORDS – Fiducial inference, Maximum likelihood, Parameter, Sufficiency, It is a great personal pleasure to join in this celebration of the friendship and scholarship of Bernard Bru.
    [Show full text]
  • Rothamsted in the Making of Sir Ronald Fisher Sc.D., F.R.S
    Rothamsted in the Making of Sir Ronald Fisher Sc.D., F.R.S. John Aldrich Economics Department University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ UK e-mail: [email protected] Abstract In 1919 the agricultural station at Rothamsted hired Ronald Fisher (1890-1962) to analyse historic data on crop yields. For him it was the beginning of a spectacular career and for Rothamsted the beginning of a Statistics Department which became a force in world statistics. Fisher arrived with publications in mathematical statistics and genetics. These were established subjects but at Rothamsted between 1919 and -33 he created the new career of agricultural research statistician. The paper considers how Rothamsted, in the person of its Director Sir John Russell, nurtured this development while supporting Fisher’s continuing work in mathematical statistics and genetics. It considers too how people associated with Fisher at Rothamsted, including assistants Wishart, Irwin and Yates and voluntary workers Tippett, Hoblyn and Hotelling contributed to establishing Fisherian statistics. September 2019 1 Introduction In 1919 a 29 year-old Cambridge mathematics graduate with no established profession started at Rothamsted Experimental Station; he died in 1962 “the most famous statistician and mathematical biologist in the world”—thus Irwin et al. (1963: 159). Sir Ronald Fisher Sc.D., F.R.S. was Balfour Professor at Cambridge when he was knighted and had been Galton Professor at University College but the higher doctorate and Fellowship of the Royal Society came when he was at Rothamsted. Ronald Aylmer Fisher would be another Galton and Balfour Professor but at Rothamsted he was the first Chief Statistician or even statistician.
    [Show full text]
  • Statistician, Geneticist and Person to Only One Fisher: the Scientist
    tri ome cs & Bi B f i o o l s t a a n t r i s u t i o c J s Journal of Biometrics & Biostatistics Fernandes DRM, J Biom Biostat 2016, 7:1 ISSN: 2155-6180 DOI: 10.4172/2155-6180.1000282 Short Communication Open Access From Three Fishers: Statistician, Geneticist and Person to Only One Fisher: The Scientist Millor Fernandes DR* Department of Animal Science, Laboratory of Animal Biotechnology, Federal University of São Carlos, campus bell Lagoon, Brazil *Corresponding author: Millor Fernandes DR, Department of Animal Science, Laboratory of Animal Biotechnology, Federal University of Sao Carlos, Campus bell Lagoon, 18290-000, Buri, São Paulo, Brazil, Tel: 502-852-1888; E-mail: [email protected] Rec date: February 19, 2016; Acc date: February 23, 2016; Pub date: February 29, 2016 Copyright: © 2016 Fernandes DRM. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Abstract Sir Ronald Fisher was the most important statistician of the twentieth century. He developed several theories that revolutionized statistics and genetics. Many scientists declared him guilty of propagation of errors because their new ideas were not understood correctly. Fisher also had a polemic and controversial social position because he arduously defended eugenics and tobacco consumption. In this paper our intention is to show the three Fishers: the statistician, the geneticist and the person. Their contributions to science were results from these three Fishers who considered one only Fisher: the scientist.
    [Show full text]
  • Careful with Causal Inference
    Careful with Causal Inference Richard Emsley Professor of Medical Statistics and Trials Methodology Department of Biostatistics & Health Informatics Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience Correlation and causation “Some scientists are reluctant to speak so blatantly about cause and effect, but in statements of hypothesis and in describing study objectives such boldness serves to keep the real goal firmly in focus and is therefore highly preferable to insipid statements about ‘association’ instead of Messerli F (2012), NEJM, 367:16 ‘causation’ Rothman (1986), Modern Epidemiology 2 Overview 1. What is causal inference? 2. How does causal inference help? ➢ Better causal questions ➢ Better confounding control 3. How can we be more careful with causal inference? ➢ Or should we be more explicit? 3 If there is a significant correlation between two variables R and Y, then either: 1. R causes Y R Y 2. Y causes R R Y R Y 3. R and Y share a common cause X X 4. R and Y are conditioned on a R Y common descendent Z Z 4 The general principle of causal inference • Statistical models can only tell us about association between two variables (say R and Y) • The aim of causal inference is to infer whether this association can be given a causal interpretation (e.g. R causes Y) by: – defining the causal estimands – being explicit about the assumptions being made – thinking about other possible explanations for observed effects, especially confounding. • There are now many, many methods purporting to give causally valid solutions to this problem; this session only gives an overview of some of these 5 A brief history of causal inference (1) • Neyman (1923) and Fisher (1925) discussed the potential yield to be gained from agricultural plots under different experimental exposures.
    [Show full text]
  • A Tutorial on Fisher Information
    Vol. X (2017) 1–59 A Tutorial on Fisher Information∗ Alexander Ly, Maarten Marsman, Josine Verhagen, Raoul Grasman and Eric-Jan Wagenmakers ∗ University of Amsterdam Department of Psychological Methods PO Box 15906 Nieuwe Achtergracht 129-B 1001 NK Amsterdam The Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] url: www.alexander-ly.com/; https://jasp-stats.org/ Abstract: In many statistical applications that concern mathematical psy- chologists, the concept of Fisher information plays an important role. In this tutorial we clarify the concept of Fisher information as it manifests itself across three different statistical paradigms. First, in the frequentist paradigm, Fisher information is used to construct hypothesis tests and confidence intervals using maximum likelihood estimators; second, in the Bayesian paradigm, Fisher information is used to define a default prior; lastly, in the minimum description length paradigm, Fisher information is used to measure model complexity. MSC 2010 subject classifications: Primary 62-01, 62B10; secondary 62F03, 62F12, 62F15, 62B10. Keywords and phrases: Confidence intervals, hypothesis testing, Jef- freys’s prior, minimum description length, model complexity, model selec- tion, statistical modeling. Contents 1 Introduction................................... 2 2 The Role of Fisher Information in Frequentist Statistics . 6 3 The Role of Fisher Information in Bayesian Statistics . 10 4 The Role of Fisher Information in Minimum Description Length . 20 5 ConcludingComments............................. 31 References ...................................... 32 A Generalization to Vector-Valued Parameters: The Fisher Information arXiv:1705.01064v2 [math.ST] 17 Oct 2017 Matrix ...................................... 39 B Frequentist Statistics based on Asymptotic Normality . 40 ∗This work was supported by the starting grant “Bayes or Bust” awarded by the Euro- pean Research Council (283876).
    [Show full text]