[Review of De Gedachtengang van de Statistica (Methodology of Statistics), by S. T. Bok]

Gerhard Tintner’s Review of S. T. Bok’s De Gedachtengang van de Statistica (1947)

Gerhard Tintner’s brief journal book review assesses Bok’s introduction to statistical methods for medical students. Its governing judgment is favorable: the book competently presents fundamental statistical ideas and procedures from a “decidedly Fisherian” standpoint, using examples from medicine and biology. Tintner moves from its teaching approach and practical aids to an international comparison, then closes with two criticisms concerning notation and further reading.

The book’s methodological emphasis is central to his approval. It supplies no mathematical proofs and substitutes useful nomographs for statistical tables, though Tintner doubts that these provide equally accurate results. He distinguishes these limitations from the broader quality of the introduction:

This book compares very favorably with similar textbooks of medical statistics published in England and America in spite of the fact that it is much shorter than most of these. The emphasis on methodology is particularly commendable.

Brevity therefore need not diminish instructional value. Tintner praises a concise treatment that foregrounds statistical reasoning, while retaining accuracy as a criterion for its computational aids.

His criticisms concern the student’s passage from this introduction into the wider discipline. Bok uses G² for the goodness-of-fit criterion conventionally denoted by χ². Tintner regards this as an unnecessary innovation: it adds to an already troublesome lack of uniform notation and makes English-language statistical literature harder for Dutch students to follow. The final objection extends this concern from symbols to access to further study:

Another more serious shortcoming is that no literature is quoted at all. No books are indicated which the student should read after having mastered this introduction.

The review thus values both methodological clarity within a textbook and continuity beyond it. Bok’s introduction receives strong praise, but its usefulness would be improved by conventions and references that help students advance into the broader statistical literature.