Statistics and the Theory of Measurement

by: DJ Hand

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (Statistics in Society), Vol. 159, No. 3. (1996), pp. 445-492.

View FullText article

DOI, JSTOR

Reviews [Write a review of this article]

There are no reviews of this article

Find related articles from these CiteULike users

Statistical Machine Learning (group), rrbarb, mdreid, ulmer

Find related articles with these CiteULike tags

measurement, methodology, no-tag, representation, statistics, theory

Abstract

Just as there are different interpretations of probability, leading to different kinds of inferential statements and different conclusions about statistical models and questions, so there are different theories of measurement, which in turn may lead to different kinds of statistical model and possibly different conclusions. This has led to much confusion and a long running debate about when different classes of statistical methods may legitimately be applied. This paper outlines the major theories of measurement and their relationships and describes the different kinds of models and hypotheses which may be formulated within each theory. One general conclusion is that the domains of applicability of the two major theories are typically different, and it is this which helps apparent contradictions to be avoided in most practical applications.

@article{citeulike:2920189, abstract = {Just as there are different interpretations of probability, leading to different kinds of inferential statements and different conclusions about statistical models and questions, so there are different theories of measurement, which in turn may lead to different kinds of statistical model and possibly different conclusions. This has led to much confusion and a long running debate about when different classes of statistical methods may legitimately be applied. This paper outlines the major theories of measurement and their relationships and describes the different kinds of models and hypotheses which may be formulated within each theory. One general conclusion is that the domains of applicability of the two major theories are typically different, and it is this which helps apparent contradictions to be avoided in most practical applications.}, author = {Hand, D. J. }, citeulike-article-id = {2920189}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2983326}, journal = {Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (Statistics in Society)}, number = {3}, pages = {445--492}, posted-at = {2008-07-13 18:23:49}, priority = {2}, publisher = {Blackwell Publishing for the Royal Statistical Society}, title = {Statistics and the Theory of Measurement}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2983326}, volume = {159}, year = {1996} }

RIS record

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:2920189 L3 - citeulike-article-id:2920189 TI - Statistics and the Theory of Measurement JF - Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (Statistics in Society) VL - 159 IS - 3 SP - 445 EP - 492 PB - Blackwell Publishing for the Royal Statistical Society N2 - Just as there are different interpretations of probability, leading to different kinds of inferential statements and different conclusions about statistical models and questions, so there are different theories of measurement, which in turn may lead to different kinds of statistical model and possibly different conclusions. This has led to much confusion and a long running debate about when different classes of statistical methods may legitimately be applied. This paper outlines the major theories of measurement and their relationships and describes the different kinds of models and hypotheses which may be formulated within each theory. One general conclusion is that the domains of applicability of the two major theories are typically different, and it is this which helps apparent contradictions to be avoided in most practical applications. AU - Hand, DJ PY - 1996/// UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2983326 ER -

RIS BibTeX