The Fisher, Neyman-Pearson Theories of Testing Hypotheses: One Theory or Two?
比较了费希尔和内曼-皮尔逊两种假设检验方法在结果解释、检验功效、条件推断和显著性水平使用上的差异，认为两者在实践中互补而非矛盾，并提出了统一方法。
Abstract The Fisher and Neyman-Pearson approaches to testing statistical hypotheses are compared with respect to their attitudes to the interpretation of the outcome, to power, to conditioning, and to the use of fixed significance levels. It is argued that despite basic philosophical differences, in their main practical aspects the two theories are complementary rather than contradictory and that a unified approach is possible that combines the best features of both. As applications, the controversies about the Behrens-Fisher problem and the comparison of two binomials (2 × 2 tables) are considered from the present point of view.