Timeline for What is the best introductory Bayesian statistics textbook?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2022 at 3:47 | comment | added | EasonL | Just wanted to add: "A good modern book on Baysian inference is Gelman et al. (1995)". The first edition of this book was recommended by the authors of The Elements of Statistical Learning. | |
| Apr 6, 2020 at 16:52 | history | edited | Richard Hardy | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 44 characters in body
|
| Apr 15, 2019 at 10:35 | comment | added | stucash | @conjectures Thanks for taking time to reply however I personally found your comment emotive as well. I do understand everyone has their own definition of being introductory but without required details in the answer and the original question, it is hard to say which version of "being introductory" should be applied in this context. That being said, I found naught101's version is as right as yours. | |
| Apr 15, 2019 at 10:24 | comment | added | conjectures | @stucash that's an emotive approach to discussing a disagreement. I guess it depends what kind of introduction you need. When someone asks me for an introduction, the response is to point them to the most compact version of the math needed to actually do something in the area. If that looks like too much work, you then need to question what exactly you get from any approach which requires less work. | |
| Apr 15, 2019 at 10:09 | comment | added | stucash | @conjectures ok so others're lying. | |
| Aug 28, 2018 at 18:47 | history | notice added | whuber♦ | Needs detailed answers | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 17:50 | comment | added | kjetil b halvorsen♦ | The first four or five chapters are truly introductory! so belongs here. | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 12:25 | comment | added | conjectures | @naught101 so you downvote without knowing the book? | |
| Jul 24, 2012 at 5:45 | comment | added | naught101 | @Shane, can you please to this answer explaining why it's your favourite? | |
| Jun 28, 2012 at 21:37 | comment | added | Sean | I started a PhD in Statistics 9 months ago and to be honest Gelman's BDA is still above me, so I wouldn't call it an introductory text! | |
| Nov 20, 2010 at 23:41 | comment | added | John Salvatier | This is an introductory book for people who have a decent amount of statistical background already. | |
| Jul 28, 2010 at 20:43 | comment | added | Paul Riedesel | Gelman et al. is well-regarded but explictly intended for a graduate course. If you don't have substantial prior coursework in statistics, it is largely a waste. | |
| Jul 23, 2010 at 15:49 | vote | accept | Shane | ||
| Sep 8, 2010 at 10:31 | |||||
| Jul 19, 2010 at 21:19 | history | answered | Shane | CC BY-SA 2.5 |