Bookmark and Share

Notice: On March 31, it was announced that Statalist is moving from an email list to a forum. The old list will shut down on April 23, and its replacement, statalist.org is already up and running.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: st: Bootstrapping question


From   Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com>
To   statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject   Re: st: Bootstrapping question
Date   Fri, 8 Feb 2013 14:20:53 +0000

We agree. I was referring to your bottom line in your previous post.

On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:18 PM, JVerkuilen (Gmail)
<jvverkuilen@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Nick Cox <njcoxstata@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I agree, but note the bottom line, namely that Henry's problem is
>> about an ordinal variable with several proportions.
>
> Yes, that's why I said that a multinomial analysis would be necessary,
> but sometimes those end up becoming contrasts of binomials.
>
>>
>> As a minute point, Jeffreys' procedure has a frequentist
>> interpretation as a continuity-corrected version of the so-called
>> exact (Clopper-Pearson) confidence interval.
>
> Yes, that's true, the same procedures can often be viewed from
> different angles. I tend to think of Bayes methods as a convenient way
> of imposing a roughness penalty on likelihoods.
*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/


© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index