IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssc/v26y1977i1p15-25.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Critical Comparison of Two Methods of Statistical Discrimination

Author

Listed:
  • J. Aitchison
  • J. D. F. Habbema
  • J. W. Kay

Abstract

Important clinical differences arising in the application of commonly advocated discriminant or diagnostic methods demand a thorough assessment of the realism of their different assessments. Recent theoretical work on the estimation of density functions provides reasons for these differences and suggests which methods should provide greater realism. These suggestions are strongly supported by a simulation study. Specific recommendations are made concerning statistical diagnostic practice.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Aitchison & J. D. F. Habbema & J. W. Kay, 1977. "A Critical Comparison of Two Methods of Statistical Discrimination," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 26(1), pages 15-25, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssc:v:26:y:1977:i:1:p:15-25
    DOI: 10.2307/2346863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2307/2346863
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2307/2346863?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. W. Krzanowski, 1984. "On the null distribution of distance between two groups, using mixed continuous and categorical variables," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 1(1), pages 243-253, December.
    2. Wojtek Krzanowski & Glenn Milligan & Stanley Wasserman & Joseph Galaskiewicz & Joel Levine & Elke Weber & Peter Fishburn & Theodore Crovello & Bernard Baum & Wayne DeSarbo, 1987. "Book reviews," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 4(1), pages 111-141, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssc:v:26:y:1977:i:1:p:15-25. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.