The Questions Of Fit In The Gregor Mendel Controversy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Ever since R. A. Fisher published his 1936 article, “Has Mendel’s Work Been Rediscovered?1’, historians of both biology and statistics have been fascinated by the surprisingly high conformity between Gregor (Johann) Mendel’s observed and expected ratios in his famous experiments with peas. Fisher’s calculated x2 statistic of the experiments, taken as a whole, suggested that results on a par or better than those Mendel reported could only be expected to occur about three times in every 100,000 attempts. The ensuing controversy as to whether or not the good Faoher “sophisticated” his data has continued to this very day. In recent years the controversy has focused upon the more teclinical question of what underlying genetic arrangement Mendel actually studied. The statistical issues of the controversy are examined in an historical and comparative perspective. The changes the controversy has gone through are evaluated, and the nature of its current, more biological, status is briefly discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2289-2304
Number of pages16
JournalCommunications in Statistics - Theory and Methods
Volume12
Issue number19
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1983
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Biology
Experiment
Statistic
Arrangement
Statistics

Keywords

  • chi-square
  • goodness of fit
  • histroy of science
  • P-value
  • understimation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Statistics and Probability

Cite this

The Questions Of Fit In The Gregor Mendel Controversy. / Piegorsch, Walter W.

In: Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, Vol. 12, No. 19, 01.01.1983, p. 2289-2304.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2d019dfa4aec4baaaaf12f9c8727a291,
title = "The Questions Of Fit In The Gregor Mendel Controversy",
abstract = "Ever since R. A. Fisher published his 1936 article, “Has Mendel’s Work Been Rediscovered?1’, historians of both biology and statistics have been fascinated by the surprisingly high conformity between Gregor (Johann) Mendel’s observed and expected ratios in his famous experiments with peas. Fisher’s calculated x2 statistic of the experiments, taken as a whole, suggested that results on a par or better than those Mendel reported could only be expected to occur about three times in every 100,000 attempts. The ensuing controversy as to whether or not the good Faoher “sophisticated” his data has continued to this very day. In recent years the controversy has focused upon the more teclinical question of what underlying genetic arrangement Mendel actually studied. The statistical issues of the controversy are examined in an historical and comparative perspective. The changes the controversy has gone through are evaluated, and the nature of its current, more biological, status is briefly discussed.",
keywords = "chi-square, goodness of fit, histroy of science, P-value, understimation",
author = "Piegorsch, {Walter W}",
year = "1983",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/03610928308828606",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "12",
pages = "2289--2304",
journal = "Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods",
issn = "0361-0926",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "19",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Questions Of Fit In The Gregor Mendel Controversy

AU - Piegorsch, Walter W

PY - 1983/1/1

Y1 - 1983/1/1

N2 - Ever since R. A. Fisher published his 1936 article, “Has Mendel’s Work Been Rediscovered?1’, historians of both biology and statistics have been fascinated by the surprisingly high conformity between Gregor (Johann) Mendel’s observed and expected ratios in his famous experiments with peas. Fisher’s calculated x2 statistic of the experiments, taken as a whole, suggested that results on a par or better than those Mendel reported could only be expected to occur about three times in every 100,000 attempts. The ensuing controversy as to whether or not the good Faoher “sophisticated” his data has continued to this very day. In recent years the controversy has focused upon the more teclinical question of what underlying genetic arrangement Mendel actually studied. The statistical issues of the controversy are examined in an historical and comparative perspective. The changes the controversy has gone through are evaluated, and the nature of its current, more biological, status is briefly discussed.

AB - Ever since R. A. Fisher published his 1936 article, “Has Mendel’s Work Been Rediscovered?1’, historians of both biology and statistics have been fascinated by the surprisingly high conformity between Gregor (Johann) Mendel’s observed and expected ratios in his famous experiments with peas. Fisher’s calculated x2 statistic of the experiments, taken as a whole, suggested that results on a par or better than those Mendel reported could only be expected to occur about three times in every 100,000 attempts. The ensuing controversy as to whether or not the good Faoher “sophisticated” his data has continued to this very day. In recent years the controversy has focused upon the more teclinical question of what underlying genetic arrangement Mendel actually studied. The statistical issues of the controversy are examined in an historical and comparative perspective. The changes the controversy has gone through are evaluated, and the nature of its current, more biological, status is briefly discussed.

KW - chi-square

KW - goodness of fit

KW - histroy of science

KW - P-value

KW - understimation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3743127951&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3743127951&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/03610928308828606

DO - 10.1080/03610928308828606

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:3743127951

VL - 12

SP - 2289

EP - 2304

JO - Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods

JF - Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods

SN - 0361-0926

IS - 19

ER -