Journal of Statistical Theory and Practice

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 187–195 | Cite as

Revisiting the Likelihoodist Evidential Account [Comment on “A Likelihood Paradigm for Clinical Trials”]

  • Aris SpanosEmail author


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Berger, J. O., and R. W. Wolpert. 1988. The likelihood principle, IMS Lecture Notes—Monograph series, 2nd ed., vol. 6, Hayward, CA, Institute of Mathematical Sciences.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Birnbaum A. 1968. Likelihood. In International encyclopedia of the social sciences, vol. 9, 299–301. New York, Macmillan and the Free Press.Google Scholar
  3. Birbaum, A. 1970. Statistical methods in scientific inference (letter to the editor) Nature, 225, 1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blume, J. D. 2011. Likelihood and its evidential framework. In Handbook of philosophy of science, vol. 7: Philosophy of statistics, ed. D. Gabbay, P. Thagard, and J. Woods, 493–511. Amsterdam, Elsevier.Google Scholar
  5. Edwards, A. W. F. 1972. Likelihood. Baltimore, MD, Johns Hopkins University Press.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Hacking, I. 1965. Logic of statistical inference. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hacking, I. 1972. Review of ‘Likelihood: An account of the statistical concept of likelihood and its application to scientific inference’ by A. F. Edwards. Philos. Sci., 23, 132–137.Google Scholar
  8. Mayo, D. G. 1996. Error and the growth of experimental knowledge, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mayo, D. G., and A. Spanos. 2006. Severe testing as a basic concept in a Neyman-Pearson philosophy of induction, Bri. J. Philos. Sci., 57, 323–357.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mayo, D. G., and A. Spanos. 2011. Error statistics. In Handbook of philosophy of science, vol. 7: Philosophy of statistics, ed. D. Gabbay, P. Thagard, and J. Woods, 15–196. Amsterdam, Elsevier.Google Scholar
  11. Neyman, J., and E. S. Pearson, 1930. On the problem of two samples. Bull. Acad. Polish Sci. Lett., 73–96.Google Scholar
  12. Royall, R. 1997. Statistical evidence: A likelihood paradigm. New York, Chapman & Hall.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Spanos, A. 2010. Is frequentist testing vulnerable to the base-rate fallacy? Philos. Sci., 77, 565–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Spanos, A. 2013. Who should be afraid of the Jeffreys-Lindley paradox? Philos. Sci., 80, 73–93.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Zhang, Z. 2006. Non-inferiority testing with a variable margin. Biometrical J., 48, 948–965.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Zhang, Z., and B. Zhang. 2013. A likelihood paradigm for clinical trials. J. Stat. Theory Pract., 7(2), 157–177.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Grace Scientific Publishing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsVirginia Tech (0316)BlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations