Abstract

ABSTRACT This article resulted from our participation in the session on the “role of expert opinion and judgment in statistical inference” at the October 2017 ASA Symposium on Statistical Inference. We present a strong, unified statement on roles of expert judgment in statistics with processes for obtaining input, whether from a Bayesian or frequentist perspective. Topics include the role of subjectivity in the cycle of scientific inference and decisions, followed by a clinical trial and a greenhouse gas emissions case study that illustrate the role of judgments and the importance of basing them on objective information and a comprehensive uncertainty assessment. We close with a call for increased proactivity and involvement of statisticians in study conceptualization, design, conduct, analysis, and communication.

Highlights

  • As participants in the October 2017 Symposium on Statistical Inference (SSI), organized and sponsored by the American Statistical Association (ASA), we were challenged to host a session and write a paper inspired by the question, “Do expert opinion and judgment have a role in statistical inference and evidence-based decision-making?” While we work from different perspectives and in different statistical paradigms, there was a resounding “yes!” among us, with ample common ground in our thinking related to this infrequently discussed and often under-appreciated component of statistical and scientific practice

  • We examine the roles of expert judgment in each of the four stages presented in Figure 1, paying particular attention to integration of statistical and content expertise

  • Results of the UK Carbon Flux Study The content experts were certainly interested in knowing how much uncertainty in the total Net Biosphere Production (NBP) would be induced by uncertainty in the inputs

Read more

Summary

Introduction

As participants in the October 2017 Symposium on Statistical Inference (SSI), organized and sponsored by the American Statistical Association (ASA), we were challenged to host a session and write a paper inspired by the question, “Do expert opinion and judgment have a role in statistical inference and evidence-based decision-making?” While we work from different perspectives and in different statistical paradigms (both frequentist and Bayesian), there was a resounding “yes!” among us, with ample common ground in our thinking related to this infrequently discussed and often under-appreciated component of statistical and scientific practice. Frequentist methods require some components of subjectivity in the choice of a model and of estimators, test statistics, etc. These choices are subjective in the sense that every expert builds knowledge and judgment into their own personal framework of understanding, which is not likely to be identical to that of anyone else. We consider the roles of expert judgment in scientific practice. Our article is organized where we share our thoughts on when and how expert judgment has a legitimate and necessary role in scientific inquiry. We include in this stage the conduct of the study, resulting in some form of data

The Cycles of Inference and Decision in Science
Question
Interpret
Inform
Science and Subjectivity
The Question Stage
The Study Stage
The Interpret Stage
The Inform Stage
But Is It Science?
Expert Judgment in Randomized Clinical Trials
Background
Conclusions

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.