Hypothesis Testing, “Dutch Book” Arguments, and Risk

Philosophy of Science 82 (5):917-929 (2015)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
“Dutch Book” arguments and references to gambling theorems are typical in the debate between Bayesians and scientists committed to “classical” statistical methods. These arguments have rarely convinced non-Bayesian scientists to abandon certain conventional practices, partially because many scientists feel that gambling theorems have little relevance to their research activities. In other words, scientists “don’t bet.” This article examines one attempt, by Schervish, Seidenfeld, and Kadane, to progress beyond such apparent stalemates by connecting “Dutch Book”–type mathematical results with principles actually endorsed by practicing experimentalists
PhilPapers/Archive ID
MALHTD
Revision history
Archival date: 2016-08-08
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Theory and Evidence.Glymour, Clark

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2015-12-08

Total views
198 ( #19,199 of 45,590 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
23 ( #30,510 of 45,590 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.