This webpage is aimed at those who have read the Editorial by Boris Crassini in the December 1997 issue of the Australian Journal of Psychology. It says there "One of the problems with the Bayesian approach is that it is not given the treatment it deserves in most research methodology/statistics textbooks used in teaching in psychology. Those interested in more information about the Bayesian approach might be interested in looking at this website http://www.wp.com/STAT."

What this is referring to is the fact that I actually have given a little bit of attention to Bayesian methods in my introductory texts --- I wrote 1400 words or so commenting on the limitations of hypothesis testing and giving an elementary example of how Bayesian strength of evidence can be calculated. (The context of the example is that of doing a hypothesis test on one mean, with the standard deviation being known, i.e., what is sometimes called a z-test.)

These comments are included in "Version 3 (Psychology and Education) of Essentials of Statistical Methods" , "Version 4 (Health and Sickness) of Essentials of Statistical Methods" , and "The Common Sense for a First Course in Statistics" .

The books are otherwise very conventional in what they cover, and I certainly do not want to claim to be a specialist in Bayesian methods. I would be interested to hear whether readers feel that what I have said is appropriate.

T P Hutchinson

phutchin@bunyip.bhs.mq.edu.au

12.Dec.97