We can consider the existence of two main statistical schools: Bayesian and frequentist. Both provide ways to deal with probability, although their methods and theories are mutually exclusive (Vallverdú 2008).
Bayesian Statistics
From a historical perspective, Bayesian appeared first, in 1763, when Richard Price published posthumously the paper of late Rev. Thomas Bayes “An Essay towards solving a Problem in the Doctrine of Chances” (Dale 2003). In this paper, Bayes presented his ideas about the best way of dealing with probability (and trying to solve the problem of inverse probability), which can be exemplified today with the classic formula called “Bayes’ Rule” or “Bayes’ Theorem”:
We must look at the notation and terminology involved:
P(A | B) is the conditional probability of A, given B. It is also called the posterior probabilitybecause it is derived...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References and Further Reading
Berger ZD (2003) Bayesian and frequentist models: legitimate choices for different purposes. AEP 13(8):583
Berger JA et al (1997) Unified frequentist and Bayesian testing of a precise hypothesis. Stat Sci 12(3):133–160
Bernardo JM, Smith AFM (1996) Bayesian theory. Wiley, USA
Bland MJ, Altman DG (1998) Bayesian and frequentists. Br Med J 317:1151–1160
Coory MD, Wills RA, Barnett AG (2009) Bayesian versus frequentist statistical inference for investigating a one-off cancer cluster reported to a health department. BMC Med Res Methodol 9:3
Cousins RD (1995) Why isn’t every physicist a Bayesian? Am J Phys 63:398
Dale AI (2003) Most honourable remembrance. The life and work of Thomas Bayes. Springer, New York
Earman J (1992) Bayes or bust? MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Efron B (1986) Why isn’t everyone a Bayesian? Am Stat 40:1–5
Giere R (1988) Understanding scientific reasoning. University of Chicago, Chicago, p 189
Gigerenzer G et al (1990) The Empire of Chance. How probability changed science and everyday life. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Good IJ (1971) 46,656 kinds of Bayesians. Am Stat 25:62–63
Hacking I (1972) Likelihood. Brit J Philos Sci 23:132–137
Howson C, Urbach P (1991) Bayesian reasoning in science. Nature 350:371–374
Kendall MG (1949) On the Reconciliation of Theories of Probability. Biometrika 36:101–116
Lilford RJ, Braunholtz D (1996) For debate: the statistical basis of public policy: a paradigm shift is overdue. Br Med J 313:603–607
Mayo DG, Cox DR (2006) Frequentist statistics as a theory of inductive inference. 2nd Lehmann symposium - optimality IMS lecture notes - monographs series, 1–28
Tan SB (2001) Bayesian methods for medical research. Ann Acad Med 30(4):444–446
Vallverdú J (2008) The false dilemma: Bayesian versus Frequentist. E – L O G O S Electronic Journal for Philosophy 1–17
Wilson G (2003) Tides of change: is Bayesianism the new paradigm in statistics? J Stat Plan Infer 113:3171–374
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this entry
Cite this entry
Vallverdú, J. (2011). Bayesian Versus Frequentist Statistical Reasoning. In: Lovric, M. (eds) International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04898-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04898-2_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04897-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04898-2
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsReference Module Computer Science and Engineering