You Know I'm All About that Bayes: Crash Course Statistics #24

Today we’re going to talk about Bayes Theorem and Bayesian hypothesis testing. Bayesian methods like these are different from how we've been approaching statistics so far, because they allow us to update our beliefs as we gather new information - which is how we tend to think naturally about the world. And this can be a really powerful tool, since it allows us to incorporate both scientifically rigorous data AND our previous biases into our evolving opinions.

CORRECTION: At 2:09 the righthand side of the equation should not have P()'s, it should just be the raw numbers.

Thanks to the following Patrons for their generous monthly contributions that help keep Crash Course free for everyone forever:

Mark Brouwer, Erika & Alexa Saur Glenn Elliott, Justin Zingsheim, Jessica Wode, Eric Prestemon, Kathrin Benoit, Tom Trval, Nathan Taylor, Divonne Holmes à Court, Brian Thomas Gossett, Khaled El Shalakany, Indika Siriwardena, SR Foxley, Sam Ferguson, Yasenia Cruz, Eric Koslow, Caleb Weeks, Tim Curwick, D.A. Noe, Shawn Arnold, Ruth Perez, Malcolm Callis, Ken Penttinen, Advait Shinde, William McGraw, Andrei Krishkevich, Rachel Bright, Mayumi Maeda, Kathy & Tim Philip, Jirat, Eric Kitchen, Ian Dundore, Chris Peters
--

Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet?

[AlvaroALorite]

Legend has it Maria is still on that cafe. She didn't say a word to her date because he was stuck on her head doing math. She hasn't spoken nor moved ever since

[knomixkhan]

After watching more then 20 videos and reading many articles related to "Bayesian Statistics"
This video cleared my concept in a very easy way
Thank you so much for sharing great video
Now my prior belief about BAYESIAN has been updated

[DudeGuyWho]

Really enjoy the style of whoever writes these video scripts.

[billdagrasshawking]

I use Bayes to convince construction workers they need to wear hard half way through explaining the equations the crew puts their gear on an begs me to stop teaching them math.
gravity still there? that's 100%, think it sucks when things hit you in the head? that's 100%
been hit in the head before? that's all in how you choose to factor

[alastairlocke]

Pretty upsetting that I paid 30 grand going to uni to end up just watching Youtube. Great series, thankyou 🙏

[sitkadiver]

I enjoyed this video. I think I can use this in my job as a LEO.... Thank you for the clear, well spoken presentation.

[TheOtherNeutrino]

Did Jordan name the dog Anakin so that he constantly has the high ground?

[weksauce]

You forgot the most important pitfall: fanatics with 0% or 100% prior beliefs can never escape them, no matter how convincing the evidence you present.

[stormyandsnowy]

You know I'm all about the Bayes, 'bout the Bayes, 'bout the Bayes; no Bell curve...

[PressEnter]

So I'm here because this rule belongs to me

[rautermann]

Best explanation of Bayes' Theorem I've heard so far. Now it feels intuitive.

Also congrats on the way you incorporated female dating psychology into statistics ("...OR JUST ASK!!!") haha

[kierans]

This episode really blew my mind. I originally watched these videos to study but now I find myself binging them just for fun.

[dwlang]

What's the probability of being a fan, seeing the new Star Wars movies, and then becoming not a fan? lol

[donfox]

I believe in gut feelings, not in the feelings in my posterior.

[nadjal]

Yayyy the Bayesian statistics I wished for last week are already here! :)

[RaphaelArgentodeSouza]

What a nice and very well explained video! Thanks for making it!

[MrVedant]

The best video I have seen about Bayesian statistics

It seems like the way to objectively analyse a thing would be to multiply the likelihood-ratios of all credible studies together. This would be the same as iteratively doing Bayes analysis on each study, constantly updating your prior, starting with the assumption that the thing is as likely as not to be true. I would argue that while not always useful (bias is sometimes the result of a lifetime of non-scientific experimentation and is not always worthless) this is the strictest definition of not having a bias.

[tahayasseri]

This video, including the animations and graphics, nicely breaks a lot of stereotypes, apart from the stereotype of scientists necessarily like Starwars (or even know anything/care about it)!

[saberepee]

I LOVE The "sisters friend" example because you can talk about caveats-

IMO it's NOT the probability of being male to multiply (0.5) it's the probability of one of your sisters friends being male!

(Varies by person so how much do you know your sister? Very rarely actually 50/50 for people)