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.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
