The DOI matches its Crossref record.
ON THE USE AND INTERPRETATION OF CERTAIN TEST CRITERIA FOR PURPOSES OF STATISTICAL INFERENCE
Abstract
In an earlier paper* we have endeavoured to emphasise the importance of placing in a logical sequence the stages of reasoning adopted in the solution of certain statistical problems, which may be termed problems of inference. In testing whether a given sample, Z, is likely to have been drawn from a population H, we have started from the simple principle that appears to be used in the judgments of ordinary life-that the degree of confidence placed in an hypothesis depends upon the relative probability or improbability of alternative hypotheses. From this point of view any criterion which is to assist in scaling the degree of confidence with which we accept or reject the hypothesis that X has been randomly drawn from HI should be one which decreases as the probability (defined in some definite manner) of alternative hypotheses becomes relatively greater. Now it is of course impossible in practice to scale the confidence with which we form a judgment with any single numerical criterion, partly because there will nearly always be present certain a priori conditions and limitations which cannot be expressed in exact terms. Yet though it may be irmpossible to bring the ideal situation into agreement with the real, some form of numerical measure is essential as a guide and control. In our previous paper we have made use of the criterion of likelihood. That there may be other forms of criteria or that this one can be interpreted in a different manner is very possible, but our object has been to find a single principle connecting the various sampling tests already in use, and one which could be extended to new problems.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Cohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771
Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures.
Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.88.3.588 · Cited by 19,023
Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-Nested Hypotheses
Vuong, Q. H. (1989) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912557 · Cited by 5,929
What's wrong with Bonferroni adjustments
Perneger, T. V. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7139.1236 · Cited by 5,900
Cohen, J. (1992) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-8721.ep10768783 · Cited by 5,870
Metadata
- Authors
- NEYMAN, J., & PEARSON, E. S.
- Venue
- Biometrika
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1928
- Volume
- 20A
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 263-294
- ISSN
- 0006-3444 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3510
- OpenAlex
- W2164145253
- Cited by
- 1,070
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: ON THE USE AND INTERPRETATION OF CERTAIN TEST CRITERIA FOR PURPOSES OF STATISTICAL INFERENCE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/biomet/20a.3-4.263
- The paper
- NEYMAN, J., & PEARSON, E. S. (1928). ON THE USE AND INTERPRETATION OF CERTAIN TEST CRITERIA FOR PURPOSES OF STATISTICAL INFERENCE. Biometrika. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/20a.3-4.263
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.