Diff for "FAQ/Bayes" - CBU statistics Wiki
location: Diff for "FAQ/Bayes"
Differences between revisions 1 and 14 (spanning 13 versions)
Revision 1 as of 2007-08-13 15:41:10
Size: 292
Editor: PeterWatson
Comment:
Revision 14 as of 2011-04-19 12:46:15
Size: 1519
Editor: PeterWatson
Comment:
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 1: Line 1:
  = How do I calculate and interpret conditional probabilities? =
Line 2: Line 4:
 = How do I calculate and interpret conditional probabilities? = Gigerenzer (2002) suggests a way to obtain conditional probabilities using frequencies in a decision tree.

Cortina and Dunlap (1997) give an example evaluating the detection rate of a test (positive/negative result) to detect schizophrenia (disorder).

To do this one fixes the following:

The base rate of schizophrenia in adults (2%)

The test will correctly identify schizophrenia (give a positive result) on 95% of people with schizophrenia

The test will correctly identify normal individuals (give a negative result) on 97% of normal people.

Despite this we can show the [attachment:bayes.doc test is unreliable].

This is a more intuitive way of illustrating the equivalent Bayesian equation:

$$\mbox{P(No disorder|+ result) = }\frac{\mbox{P(No disorder) * P(+ result | No disorder)}}{\mbox{P(No disorder) * P(+ result | No disorder) + P(Disorder) * P(- result | Disorder)}}$$

A talk with subtitles further illustrating aspects of conditional probabilities given by Ted Donnelly (Oxford), a geneticist, is available for viewing [http://blog.ted.com/2006/11/statistician_pe.php here.]

 * [attachment:bayes2.doc:More on Bayes theorem:Illustration of priors and likelihoods]

__References__

How do I calculate and interpret conditional probabilities?

Gigerenzer (2002) suggests a way to obtain conditional probabilities using frequencies in a decision tree.

Cortina and Dunlap (1997) give an example evaluating the detection rate of a test (positive/negative result) to detect schizophrenia (disorder).

To do this one fixes the following:

The base rate of schizophrenia in adults (2%)

The test will correctly identify schizophrenia (give a positive result) on 95% of people with schizophrenia

The test will correctly identify normal individuals (give a negative result) on 97% of normal people.

Despite this we can show the [attachment:bayes.doc test is unreliable].

This is a more intuitive way of illustrating the equivalent Bayesian equation:

$$\mbox{P(No disorder|+ result) = }\frac{\mbox{P(No disorder) * P(+ result | No disorder)}}{\mbox{P(No disorder) * P(+ result | No disorder) + P(Disorder) * P(- result | Disorder)}}$$

A talk with subtitles further illustrating aspects of conditional probabilities given by Ted Donnelly (Oxford), a geneticist, is available for viewing [http://blog.ted.com/2006/11/statistician_pe.php here.]

  • [attachment:bayes2.doc:More on Bayes theorem:Illustration of priors and likelihoods]

References

Cortina JM, Dunlap WP (1997) On the logic and purpose of significance testing Psychological methods 2(2) 161-172.

Gigerenzer G. (2002) Reckoning with risk: learning to live with uncertainty. London: Penguin.

None: FAQ/Bayes (last edited 2018-08-20 09:42:10 by PeterWatson)