On 20 Feb 2004 05:10:14 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tanguma, Jesus) wrote: ... > > > I am trying to find information on Type I, II, III and IV error rates in > hypothesis testing. > > Any sources would be greatly appreciated. >
I did a groups.google search on "type iv error" for sci.stat.* and found my own post from 16 Nov 2000, along with 10 others in that thread, and 3 other threads. "Type iii" resulted in more - ========== Bill Jefferys remarked in the same Nov. 2000 thread : Howard Raiffa (Decision Analysis, footnote, p. 264) agrees that errors of the third kind are "solving the wrong problem", and attributes this to John Tukey. He also nominates for error of the fourth kind "solving the right problem too late". ========== end of post ========== start of my post On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 08:40:38 GMT, Kresten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Howard Raiffa (Decision Analysis, footnote, p. 264) agrees that > > errors > > of the third kind are "solving the wrong problem", and attributes > > this to John Tukey > > My ref is: > > Kimball, AW (1957) > Errors of the third kind in statistical consulting > J Am Stat Assoc 57, 133 > > Haven't got the paper, though. We seemed to have established "Kimball" as the originator, a couple of weeks ago. In my post of Oct 31, I reported that Google finds various citations, with Kimball being the most frequent (and earliest). Also on the Web, there are references to Dobson and Cook, whose Type III and Type IV have some currency in evaluation research -- These seem to be an extension of the wisecrack, making it particular to their area. > > "... Evaluators commonly make two types of errors doing evaluations: Type III error is measuring something that does not exist; Type IV error is measuring something that is of no interest to management and policy maker." (Scanlon et al., 1977,p.36 , cit. after Dobson & Cook, 1980, p. 270 ). There is another definition cited a few times which is seemingly technical, "rejecting the null, but in the wrong direction". I think that is a similar sneer at bone-headedness. There is no "wrong direction" with a two-tailed test, and, again, it implies for the one-tailed test that you are "asking the wrong question." As someone else posted more elegantly, it surely is not on the same plane as the technical statements of "Type I" and "Type II" error. ========== end of post Radford Neal posted that "wrong direction" might be worth calling something special, and I'm more prone to agree now than I was then. -- Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html "Taxes are the price we pay for civilization." . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
