Non-Standard Errors

In statistics, samples are drawn from a population in a data-generating process (DGP). Standard errors measure the uncertainty in estimates of population parameters. In science, evidence is generated to test hypotheses in an evidence-generating process (EGP). We claim that EGP variation across researchers adds uncertainty: Non-standard errors (NSEs). We study NSEs by letting 164 teams test the same hypotheses on the same data. NSEs turn out to be sizable, but smaller for better reproducible or higher rated research. Adding peer-review stages reduces NSEs. We further find that this type of uncertainty is underestimated by participants

Advanced text authorship detection methods and their application to biblical texts

Authorship attribution has a range of applications in a growing number of fields such as forensic evidence, plagiarism detection, email filtering, and web information management. In this study, three attribution techniques are extended, tested on a corpus of English texts, and applied to a book in the New Testament of disputed authorship. The word recurrence interval method compares standard deviations of the number of words between successive occurrences of a keyword both graphically and with chi-squared tests. The trigram Markov method compares the probabilities of the occurrence of words conditional on the preceding two words to determine the similarity between texts. The third method extracts stylometric measures such as the frequency of occurrence of function words and from these constructs text classification models using multiple discriminant analysis. The effectiveness of these techniques is compared. The accuracy of the results obtained by some of these extended methods is higher than many of the current state of the art approaches. Statistical evidence is presented about the authorship of the selected book from the New Testament

Non-Standard Errors

In statistics, samples are drawn from a population in a data-generating process (DGP). Standard errors measure the uncertainty in estimates of population parameters. In science, evidence is generated to test hypotheses in an evidence-generating process (EGP). We claim that EGP variation across researchers adds uncertainty: Non-standard errors (NSEs). We study NSEs by letting 164 teams test the same hypotheses on the same data. NSEs turn out to be sizable, but smaller for better reproducible or higher rated research. Adding peer-review stages reduces NSEs. We further find that this type of uncertainty is underestimated by participants

Non-Standard Errors

In statistics, samples are drawn from a population in a data-generating process (DGP). Standard errors measure the uncertainty in sample estimates of population parameters. In science, evidence is generated to test hypotheses in an evidence-generating process (EGP). We claim that EGP variation across researchers adds uncertainty: non-standard errors. To study them, we let 164 teams test six hypotheses on the same sample. We find that non-standard errors are sizeable, on par with standard errors. Their size (i) co-varies only weakly with team merits, reproducibility, or peer rating, (ii) declines significantly after peer-feedback, and (iii) is underestimated by participants