A practical solution to the pervasive problems ofp values (original) (raw)

References

• Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control,19, 716–723.
  Article Google Scholar
• Anscombe, F. J. (1954). Fixed-sample-size analysis of sequential observations.Biometrics,10, 89–100.
  Article Google Scholar
• Anscombe, F. J. (1963). Sequential medical trials.Journal of the American Statistical Association,58, 365–383.
  Article Google Scholar
• Armitage, P. (1957). Restricted sequential procedures.Biometrika,44, 9–26.
  Google Scholar
• Armitage, P. (1960).Sequential medical trials. Springfield, IL: Thomas.
• Armitage, P., McPherson, C. K., &Rowe, B. C. (1969). Repeated significance tests on accumulating data.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A,132, 235–244.
  Article Google Scholar
• Bakan, D. (1966). The test of significance in psychological research.Psychological Bulletin,66, 423–437.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Barnard, G. A. (1947). The meaning of a significance level.Biometrika,34, 179–182.
  Google Scholar
• Basu, D. (1964). Recovery of ancillary information.Sankhya: Series A,26, 3–16.
  Google Scholar
• Bayarri, M.-J., &Berger, J. O. (2004). The interplay of Bayesian and frequentist analysis.Statistical Science,19, 58–80.
  Article Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O. (1985).Statistical decision theory and Bayesian analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
  Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O. (2003). Could Fisher, Jeffreys and Neyman have agreed on testing?Statistical Science,18, 1–32.
  Article Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O., &Berry, D. A. (1988a). The relevance of stopping rules in statistical inference. In S. S. Gupta & J. O. Berger (Eds.),Statistical decision theory and related topics IV (Vol. 1, pp. 29–72). New York: Springer.
  Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O., &Berry, D. A. (1988b). Statistical analysis and the illusion of objectivity.American Scientist,76, 159–165.
  Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O., Boukai, B., &Wang, Y. (1997). Unified frequentist and Bayesian testing of a precise hypothesis (with discussion).Statistical Science,12, 133–160.
  Article Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O., Brown, L., &Wolpert, R. (1994). A unified conditional frequentist and Bayesian test for fixed and sequential hypothesis testing.Annals of Statistics,22, 1787–1807.
  Article Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O., &Delampady, M. (1987). Testing precise hypotheses.Statistical Science,2, 317–352.
  Article Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O., &Mortera, J. (1999). Default Bayes factors for nonnested hypothesis testing.Journal of the American Statistical Association,94, 542–554.
  Article Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O., &Pericchi, L. R. (1996). The intrinsic Bayes factor for model selection and prediction.Journal of the American Statistical Association,91, 109–122.
  Article Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O., &Sellke, T. (1987). Testing a point null hypothesis: The irreconcilability of p values and evidence.Journal of the American Statistical Association,82, 112–139.
  Article Google Scholar
• Berger, J. O., &Wolpert, R. L. (1988).The likelihood principle (2nd ed.). Hayward, CA: Institute of Mathematical Statistics.
  Google Scholar
• Bernardo, J. M., &Smith, A. F. M. (1994).Bayesian theory. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
  Book Google Scholar
• Birnbaum, A. (1962). On the foundations of statistical inference (with discussion).Journal of the American Statistical Association,53, 259–326.
  Google Scholar
• Birnbaum, A. (1977). The Neyman—Pearson theory as decision theory, and as inference theory; with a criticism of the Lindley—Savage argument for Bayesian theory.Synthese,36, 19–49.
  Article Google Scholar
• Box, G. E. P., &Tiao, G. C. (1973).Bayesian inference in statistical analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  Google Scholar
• Browne, M. (2000). Cross-validation methods.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,44, 108–132.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Burdette, W. J., &Gehan, E. A. (1970).Planning and analysis of clinical studies. Springfield, IL: Thomas.
  Google Scholar
• Burnham, K. P., &Anderson, D. R. (2002).Model selection and multimodel inference: A practical information-theoretic approach (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
  Google Scholar
• Busemeyer, J. R., &Stout, J. C. (2002). A contribution of cognitive decision models to clinical assessment: Decomposing performance on the Bechara gambling task.Psychological Assessment,14, 253–262.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Christensen, R. (2005). Testing Fisher, Neyman, Pearson, and Bayes.American Statistician,59, 121–126.
  Article Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1994). The earth is round (p <.05).American Psychologist,49, 997–1003.
  Article Google Scholar
• Cornfield, J. (1966). Sequential trials, sequential analysis, and the likelihood principle.American Statistician,20, 18–23.
  Article Google Scholar
• Cornfield, J. (1969). The Bayesian outlook and its application.Biometrics,25, 617–657.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Cortina, J. M., &Dunlap, W. P. (1997). On the logic and purpose of significance testing.Psychological Methods,2, 161–172.
  Article Google Scholar
• Cox, D. R. (1958). Some problems connected with statistical inference.Annals of Mathematical Statistics,29, 357–372.
  Article Google Scholar
• Cox, D. R. (1971). The choice between alternative ancillary statistics.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B,33, 251–255.
  Google Scholar
• Cox, R. T. (1946). Probability, frequency and reasonable expectation.American Journal of Physics,14, 1–13.
  Article Google Scholar
• Cumming, G. (2007). Replication and p values: p values predict the future vaguely, but confidence intervals do better. Manuscript submitted for publication.
• D’Agostini, G. (1999). Teaching statistics in the physics curriculum: Unifying and clarifying role of subjective probability.American Journal of Physics,67, 1260–1268.
  Article Google Scholar
• Dawid, A. P. (1984). Statistical theory: The prequential approach.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A,147, 278–292.
  Article Google Scholar
• De Finetti, B. (1974).Theory of probability: A critical introductory treatment (Vols. 1 & 2; A. Machí & A. Smith, Trans.). London: Wiley.
  Google Scholar
• Diamond, G. A., &Forrester, J. S. (1983). Clinical trials and statistical verdicts: Probable grounds for appeal.Annals of Internal Medicine,98, 385–394.
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Dickey, J. M. (1973). Scientific reporting and personal probabilities: Student’s hypothesis.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B,35, 285–305.
  Google Scholar
• Dickey, J. M. (1977). Is the tail area useful as an approximate Bayes factor?Journal of the American Statistical Association,72, 138–142.
  Article Google Scholar
• Dixon, P. (2003). The p value fallacy and how to avoid it.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,57, 189–202.
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Djurić, P. M. (1998). Asymptotic MAP criteria for model selection.IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing,46, 2726–2735.
  Article Google Scholar
• Edwards, A. W. F. (1992).Likelihood. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  Google Scholar
• Edwards, W., Lindman, H., &Savage, L. J. (1963). Bayesian statistical inference for psychological research.Psychological Review,70, 193–242.
  Article Google Scholar
• Efron, B. (2005). Bayesians, frequentists, and scientists.Journal of the American Statistical Association,100, 1–5.
  Article Google Scholar
• Efron, B., &Tibshirani, R. (1997). Improvements on cross-validation: The.6321 bootstrap method.Journal of the American Statistical Association,92, 548–560.
  Article Google Scholar
• Feller, W. (1940). Statistical aspects of ESP.Journal of Parapsychology,4, 271–298.
  Google Scholar
• Feller, W. (1970).An introduction to probability theory and its applications: Vol. 1 (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
  Google Scholar
• Fine, T. L. (1973).Theories of probability: An examination of foundations. New York: Academic Press.
  Google Scholar
• Firth, D., &Kuha, J. (1999). Comments on “A critique of the Bayesian information criterion for model selection.”Sociological Methods & Research,27, 398–402.
  Article Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. A. (1934).Statistical methods for research workers (5th ed.). London: Oliver & Boyd.
  Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. A. (1935a).The design of experiments. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.
  Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. A. (1935b). The logic of inductive inference (with discussion).Journal of the Royal Statistical Society,98, 39–82.
  Article Google Scholar
• Fisher, R. A. (1958).Statistical methods for research workers (13th ed.). New York: Hafner.
  Google Scholar
• Freireich, E. J., Gehan, E., Frei, E., III,Schroeder, L. R., Wolman, I. J., Anbari, R., et al. (1963). The effect of 6-mercaptopurine on the duration of steroid-induced remissions in acute leukemia: A model for evaluation of other potentially useful therapy.Blood,21, 699–716.
  Google Scholar
• Frick, R. W. (1996). The appropriate use of null hypothesis testing.Psychological Methods,1, 379–390.
  Article Google Scholar
• Friedman, L. M., Furberg, C. D., &DeMets, D. L. (1998).Fundamentals of clinical trials (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.
  Google Scholar
• Galavotti, M. C. (2005).A philosophical introduction to probability. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
  Google Scholar
• Geisser, S. (1975). The predictive sample reuse method with applications.Journal of the American Statistical Association,70, 320–328.
  Article Google Scholar
• Gelman, A., &Rubin, D. B. (1999). Evaluating and using statistical methods in the social sciences.Sociological Methods & Research,27, 403–410.
  Article Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G. (1993). The superego, the ego, and the id in statistical reasoning. In G. Keren & C. Lewis (Eds.),A handbook for data analysis in the behavioral sciences: Methodological issues (pp. 311–339). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G. (1998). We need statistical thinking, not statistical rituals.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,21, 199–200.
  Article Google Scholar
• Gilks, W. R., Richardson, S., &Spiegelhalter, D. J. (Eds.) (1996).Markov chain Monte Carlo in practice. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
  Google Scholar
• Gill, J. (2002).Bayesian methods: A social and behavioral sciences approach. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  Google Scholar
• Glover, S., &Dixon, P. (2004). Likelihood ratios: A simple and flexible statistic for empirical psychologists.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,11, 791–806.
  Google Scholar
• Good, I. J. (1983).Good thinking: The foundations of probability and its applications. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  Google Scholar
• Good, I. J. (1985). Weight of evidence: A brief survey. In J. M. Bernardo, M. H. DeGroot, D. V. Lindley, & A. F. M. Smith (Eds.),Bayesian statistics 2: Proceedings of the Second Valencia International Meeting, September 6/10, 1983 (pp. 249–269). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
  Google Scholar
• Goodman, S. N. (1993).p values, hypothesis tests, and likelihood: Implications for epidemiology of a neglected historical debate.American Journal of Epidemiology,137, 485–496.
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Grünwald, P. [D.] (2000). Model selection based on minimum description length.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,44, 133–152.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Grünwald, P. D., Myung, I. J., &Pitt, M. A. (Eds.) (2005).Advances in minimum description length: Theory and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  Google Scholar
• Hacking, I. (1965).Logic of statistical inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  Google Scholar
• Hagen, R. L. (1997). In praise of the null hypothesis statistical test.American Psychologist,52, 15–24.
  Article Google Scholar
• Haldane, J. B. S. (1945). On a method of estimating frequencies.Biometrika,33, 222–225.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Hannan, E. J. (1980). The estimation of the order of an ARMA process.Annals of Statistics,8, 1071–1081.
  Article Google Scholar
• Helland, I. S. (1995). Simple counterexamples against the conditionality principle.American Statistician,49, 351–356.
  Article Google Scholar
• Hill, B. M. (1985). Some subjective Bayesian considerations in the selection of models.Econometric Reviews,4, 191–246.
  Article Google Scholar
• Howson, C., &Urbach, P. (2005).Scientific reasoning: The Bayesian approach (3rd. ed.). Chicago: Open Court.
  Google Scholar
• Hubbard, R., &Bayarri, M.-J. (2003). Confusion over measures of evidence (_p_’s) versus errors (_a_’s) in classical statistical testing.American Statistician,57, 171–182.
  Article Google Scholar
• Jaynes, E. T. (1968). Prior probabilities.IEEE Transactions on Systems Science & Cybernetics,4, 227–241.
  Article Google Scholar
• Jaynes, E. T. (2003).Probability theory: The logic of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  Book Google Scholar
• Jeffreys, H. (1961).Theory of probability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  Google Scholar
• Jennison, C., &Turnbull, B. W. (1990). Statistical approaches to interim monitoring of medical trials: A review and commentary.Statistical Science,5, 299–317.
  Article Google Scholar
• Kadane, J. B., Schervish, M. J., &Seidenfeld, T. (1996). Reasoning to a foregone conclusion.Journal of the American Statistical Association,91, 1228–1235.
  Article Google Scholar
• Karabatsos, G. (2006). Bayesian nonparametric model selection and model testing.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,50, 123–148.
  Article Google Scholar
• Kass, R. E. (1993). Bayes factors in practice.Statistician,42, 551–560.
  Article Google Scholar
• Kass, R. E., &Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayes factors.Journal of the American Statistical Association,90, 377–395.
  Google Scholar
• Kass, R. E., &Wasserman, L. (1995). A reference Bayesian test for nested hypotheses and its relationship to the Schwarz criterion.Journal of the American Statistical Association,90, 928–934.
  Article Google Scholar
• Kass, R. E., &Wasserman, L. (1996). The selection of prior distributions by formal rules.Journal of the American Statistical Association,91, 1343–1370.
  Article Google Scholar
• Killeen, P. R. (2005a). An alternative to null-hypothesis significance tests.Psychological Science,16, 345–353.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Killeen, P. R. (2005b). Replicability, confidence, and priors.Psychological Science,16, 1009–1012.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Killeen, P. R. (2006). Beyond statistical inference: A decision theory for science.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,13, 549–562.
  Google Scholar
• Klugkist, I., Laudy, O., &Hoijtink, H. (2005). Inequality constrained analysis of variance: A Bayesian approach.Psychological Methods,10, 477–493.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Lee, M. D. (2002). Generating additive clustering models with limited stochastic complexity.Journal of Classification,19, 69–85.
  Article Google Scholar
• Lee, M. D., &Pope, K. J. (2006). Model selection for the rate problem: A comparison of significance testing, Bayesian, and minimum description length statistical inference.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,50, 193–202.
  Article Google Scholar
• Lee, M. D., &Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2005). Bayesian statistical inference in psychology: Comment on Trafimow (2003).Psychological Review,112, 662–668.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Lee, P. M. (1989).Bayesian statistics: An introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
  Google Scholar
• Lindley, D. V. (1957). A statistical paradox.Biometrika,44, 187–192.
  Google Scholar
• Lindley, D. V. (1972).Bayesian statistics: A review. Philadelphia: Society for Industrial & Applied Mathematics.
  Google Scholar
• Lindley, D. V. (1977). The distinction between inference and decision.Synthese,36, 51–58.
  Article Google Scholar
• Lindley, D. V. (1982). Scoring rules and the inevitability of probability.International Statistical Review,50, 1–26.
  Article Google Scholar
• Lindley, D. V. (1993). The analysis of experimental data: The appreciation of tea and wine.Teaching Statistics,15, 22–25.
  Article Google Scholar
• Lindley, D. V. (2004). That wretched prior.Significance,1, 85–87.
  Article Google Scholar
• Lindley, D. V., &Phillips, L. D. (1976). Inference for a Bernoulli process (a Bayesian view).American Statistician,30, 112–119.
  Article Google Scholar
• Lindley, D. V., &Scott, W. F. (1984).New Cambridge elementary statistical tables. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  Google Scholar
• Loftus, G. R. (1996). Psychology will be a much better science when we change the way we analyze data.Current Directions in Psychological Science,5, 161–171.
  Article Google Scholar
• Loftus, G. R. (2002). Analysis, interpretation, and visual presentation of experimental data. In H. Pashler (Ed. in Chief) & J. Wixted (Vol. Ed.),Stevens’ Handbook of experimental psychology: Vol. 4. Methodology in experimental psychology (3rd ed., pp. 339–390). New York: Wiley.
  Google Scholar
• Ludbrook, J. (2003). Interim analyses of data as they accumulate in laboratory experimentation.BMC Medical Research Methodology,3, 15.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• McCarroll, D., Crays, N., &Dunlap, W. P. (1992). Sequential ANOVAs and Type I error rates.Educational & Psychological Measurement,52, 387–393.
  Article Google Scholar
• Myung, I. J. (2000). The importance of complexity in model selection.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,44, 190–204.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Myung, I. J., Forster, M. R., & Browne, M. W. (Eds.) (2000). Model selection [Special issue].Journal of Mathematical Psychology,44(1).
• Myung, I. J., Navarro, D. J., &Pitt, M. A. (2006). Model selection by normalized maximum likelihood.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,50, 167–179.
  Article Google Scholar
• Myung, I. J., &Pitt, M. A. (1997). Applying Occam’s razor in modeling cognition: A Bayesian approach.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,4, 79–95.
  Google Scholar
• Nelson, N., Rosenthal, R., &Rosnow, R. L. (1986). Interpretation of significance levels and effect sizes by psychological researchers.American Psychologist,41, 1299–1301.
  Article Google Scholar
• Neyman, J. (1977). Frequentist probability and frequentist statistics.Synthese,36, 97–131.
  Article Google Scholar
• Neyman, J., &Pearson, E. S. (1933). On the problem of the most efficient tests of statistical hypotheses.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society: Series A,231, 289–337.
  Article Google Scholar
• Nickerson, R. S. (2000). Null hypothesis statistical testing: A review of an old and continuing controversy.Psychological Methods,5, 241–301.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• O’Hagan, A. (1997). Fractional Bayes factors for model comparison.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B,57, 99–138.
  Google Scholar
• O’Hagan, A. (2004). Dicing with the unknown.Significance,1, 132–133.
  Article Google Scholar
• O’Hagan, A., &Forster, J. (2004).Kendall’s advanced theory of statistics: Vol. 2B. Bayesian inference (2nd ed.). London: Arnold.
  Google Scholar
• Pauler, D. K. (1998). The Schwarz criterion and related methods for normal linear models.Biometrika,85, 13–27.
  Article Google Scholar
• Peto, R., Pike, M. C., Armitage, P., Breslow, N. E., Cox, D. R., Howard, S. V., et al. (1976). Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient: I. Introduction and design.British Journal of Cancer,34, 585–612.
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Pitt, M. A., Myung, I. J., &Zhang, S. (2002). Toward a method of selecting among computational models of cognition.Psychological Review,109, 472–491.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Pocock, S. J. (1983).Clinical trials: A practical approach. New York: Wiley.
  Google Scholar
• Pratt, J. W. (1961). [Review of Lehmann, E. L., Testing statistical hypotheses].Journal of the American Statistical Association,56, 163–167.
  Article Google Scholar
• Pratt, J. W. (1962). On the foundations of statistical inference: Discussion.Journal of the American Statistical Association,57, 314–315.
  Google Scholar
• Raftery, A. E. (1993). Bayesian model selection in structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.),Testing structural equation models (pp. 163–180). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  Google Scholar
• Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. In P. V. Marsden (Ed.),Sociological methodology 1995 (pp. 111–196). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
  Google Scholar
• Raftery, A. E. (1996). Hypothesis testing and model selection. In W. R. Gilks, S. Richardson, & D. J. Spiegelhalter (Eds.),Markov chain Monte Carlo in practice (pp. 163–187). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
  Google Scholar
• Raftery, A. E. (1999). Bayes factors and BIC.Sociological Methods & Research,27, 411–427.
  Article Google Scholar
• Rissanen, J. (2001). Strong optimality of the normalized ML models as universal codes and information in data.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory,47, 1712–1717.
  Article Google Scholar
• Robert, C. P., &Casella, G. (1999).Monte Carlo statistical methods. New York: Springer.
  Google Scholar
• Rosenthal, R., &Gaito, J. (1963). The interpretation of levels of significance by psychological researchers.Journal of Psychology,55, 33–38.
  Article Google Scholar
• Rouder, J. N., &Lu, J. (2005). An introduction to Bayesian hierarchical models with an application in the theory of signal detection.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,12, 573–604.
  Google Scholar
• Rouder, J. N., Lu, J., Speckman, P., Sun, D., &Jiang, Y. (2005). A hierarchical model for estimating response time distributions.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,12, 195–223.
  Google Scholar
• Royall, R. M. (1997).Statistical evidence: A likelihood paradigm. London: Chapman & Hall.
  Google Scholar
• Savage, L. J. (1954).The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.
  Google Scholar
• Schervish, M. J. (1996).P values: What they are and what they are not.American Statistician,50, 203–206.
  Article Google Scholar
• Schmidt, F. L. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers.Psychological Methods,1, 115–129.
  Article Google Scholar
• Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model.Annals of Statistics,6, 461–464.
  Article Google Scholar
• Sellke, T., Bayarri, M.-J., &Berger, J. O. (2001). Calibration of p values for testing precise null hypotheses.American Statistician,55, 62–71.
  Article Google Scholar
• Shafer, G. (1982). Lindley’s paradox.Journal of the American Statistical Association,77, 325–351.
  Article Google Scholar
• Siegmund, D. (1985).Sequential analysis: Tests and confidence intervals. New York: Springer.
  Google Scholar
• Smith, A. F. M., &Spiegelhalter, D. J. (1980). Bayes factors and choice criteria for linear models.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B,42, 213–220.
  Google Scholar
• Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions (with discussion).Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B,36, 111–147.
  Google Scholar
• Strube, M. J. (2006). SNOOP: A program for demonstrating the consequences of premature and repeated null hypothesis testing.Behavior Research Methods,38, 24–27.
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Stuart, A., Ord, J. K., &Arnold, S. (1999).Kendall’s advanced theory of statistics: Vol. 2A. Classical inference and the linear model (6th ed.). London: Arnold.
  Google Scholar
• Trafimow, D. (2003). Hypothesis testing and theory evaluation at the boundaries: Surprising insights from Bayes’s theorem.Psychological Review,110, 526–535.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Vickers, D., Lee, M. D., Dry, M., &Hughes, P. (2003). The roles of the convex hull and the number of potential intersections in performance on visually presented traveling salesperson problems.Memory & Cognition,31, 1094–1104.
  Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2003). How many parameters does it take to fit an elephant? [Book review].Journal of Mathematical Psychology,47, 580–586.
  Article Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers, E.-J., &Farrell, S. (2004). AIC model selection using Akaike weights.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,11, 192–196.
  Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers, E.-J., &Grünwald, P. (2006). A Bayesian perspective on hypothesis testing: A comment on Killeen (2005).Psychological Science,17, 641–642.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers, E.-J., Grünwald, P., &Steyvers, M. (2006). Accumulative prediction error and the selection of time series models.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,50, 149–166.
  Article Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers, E.-J., Ratcliff, R., Gomez, P., &Iverson, G. J. (2004). Assessing model mimicry using the parametric bootstrap.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,48, 28–50.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Wagenmakers, E.-J., & Waldorp, L. (Eds.) (2006). Model selection: Theoretical developments and applications [Special issue].Journal of Mathematical Psychology,50(2).
• Wainer, H. (1999). One cheer for null hypothesis significance testing.Psychological Methods,4, 212–213.
  Article Google Scholar
• Wallace, C. S., &Dowe, D. L. (1999). Refinements of MDL and MML coding.Computer Journal,42, 330–337.
  Article Google Scholar
• Ware, J. H. (1989). Investigating therapies of potentially great benefit: ECMO.Statistical Science,4, 298–340.
  Article Google Scholar
• Wasserman, L. (2000). Bayesian model selection and model averaging.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,44, 92–107.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Wasserman, L. (2004).All of statistics: A concise course in statistical inference. New York: Springer.
  Google Scholar
• Weakliem, D. L. (1999). A critique of the Bayesian information criterion for model selection.Sociological Methods & Research,27, 359–397.
  Article Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, L., &the Task Force on Statistical Inference (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.American Psychologist,54, 594–604.
  Article Google Scholar
• Winship, C. (1999). Editor’s introduction to the special issue on the Bayesian information criterion.Sociological Methods & Research,27, 355–358.
  Article Google Scholar
• Xie, Y. (1999). The tension between generality and accuracy.Sociological Methods & Research,27, 428–435.
  Article Google Scholar

Download references