Posted by Andrew on 7 November 2019, 5:48 pm

## Recent Comments

- digithead on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- steven t johnson on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Andrew on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Daniel Lakeland on What’s the American Statistical Association gonna say in their Task Force on Statistical Significance and Replicability?
- Giacomo Petrillo on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Andrew on What’s the American Statistical Association gonna say in their Task Force on Statistical Significance and Replicability?
- Matt Skaggs on What’s the American Statistical Association gonna say in their Task Force on Statistical Significance and Replicability?
- Giacomo Petrillo on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Chris Wilson on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Dan C on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Andrew on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Dan C on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Andrew on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Andrew on What’s the American Statistical Association gonna say in their Task Force on Statistical Significance and Replicability?
- Paul Hayes on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Stuart Hurlbert on What’s the American Statistical Association gonna say in their Task Force on Statistical Significance and Replicability?
- David Colquhoun on What’s the American Statistical Association gonna say in their Task Force on Statistical Significance and Replicability?
- Shravan on How to embrace variation and accept uncertainty in linguistic and psycholinguistic data analysis
- Carlos Ungil on Holes in Bayesian Statistics
- Garnett on How to embrace variation and accept uncertainty in linguistic and psycholinguistic data analysis

## Categories

Every single time I get an email notification about this thread, I naively assume that something big happened (authors responded or the editors decided to retract)… Wonder how long we’ll have to wait for this one

Zad:

It could go the “power pose” route where the one author retracts, one author keeps plugging the idea, and the other authors lie low.