PROOF? NO. EVIDENCE? NO. A SKEPTIC'S COMMENT ON INVERARITY'S USE OF STATISTICAL INFERENCE.
The purpose of the comment in this article is twofold. These are to provide some groundwork for religious leader James M. Inverarity's response and to call attention to special issues regarding statistical inference for historical data. Perhaps the most common justification in sociology for. statist...
| Publicado en: | American Sociological Review Vol. 42; no. 4; pp. 652 - 657 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Sage Publications Inc.
Aug77
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| Sumario: | The purpose of the comment in this article is twofold. These are to provide some groundwork for religious leader James M. Inverarity's response and to call attention to special issues regarding statistical inference for historical data. Perhaps the most common justification in sociology for. statistical inference rests on a hypothetical model in which a very large number of probability samples are independently drawn from a population of fixed values and a sampling distribution of the resulting population estimates is constructed. Statistical inference is mandated by a special kind of stochastic distortion or error introduced by the researcher when only part of a population of fixed values is studied. Each observation can be seen as a random variable and building on the assumption of a very large number of independent repeated drawings by mathematicians and statisticians have provided the techniques with which to estimate from a single sample, the long run consequences of the sampling process. |
|---|