I thank all the discussants for their many critiques and comments, and for their considerable efforts. Many of the points raised are ones with which I (at least in part) agree. It therefore seems easiest to first deal with a number of points with which I don’t agree. First, Fuchs states (and Bentley appears to assume) that my analysis is documented in a book and in a movie, neither of which I h...

In this response to comments on her book How Professors Think, Lamont discussesseveral points raised by discussants. She also contrasts their respective perspectives and the com-plementarity of their viewpoints. She identifies the questions they leave open, possible ambigui-ties in interpretation, as well as topics for future research.

This note is a rejoinder on our paper in this issue. It attempts to provide some clari cations and thoughts in connection with the discussions/comments made about it by Didier Dubois and Sébastien Destercke. We hope our comments are at the level of the discussants'.

emerge from the ample comments provided by the discussants. These comments have been given from the individual perspectives of expertise in quite different fields which interestingly allow to connect originally disjoint strains of thoughts. For this reason we organize our rejoinder by following these specific issues and perspectives, rather than by addressing each contribution separately and th...

We would like to take this opportunity to thank the discussants for their thoughtful comments and encouragements on our work. The discussants raised a number of issues from theoretical as well as computational perspectives. Our rejoinder will try to provide some insights into these issues and address specific questions asked by the discussants. Most traditional variable selection criteria, such...

Abstract Healthy eating policies have become a hot and thorny domain of public concern because they affect people’s liberties, life prospects, expenditures. However, what state institutions may legitimately enforce is controversial matter. Is paternalism for the sake health permissible? Could people be incentivized to eat in healthier manner? Barnhill Bonotti’s recent book ( Eating Policy Polit...

We are very grateful to the Executive Editors George Casella and Edward George for their active interest in our paper and for organizing this challenging discussion. We also thank all the discussants for their insightful and stimulating comments. When we submitted the original manuscript in 2003, we were tempted to go for a more general paper on kernel methods. We decided to focus on support ve...

Forum discussions have been utilised widely as a means of facilitating learning interaction and social-knowledge construction in online learning. Much research has conducted on the instructional interventions that benefit asynchronous discussions. Role-playing, or assigning roles to discussants, proven effective promoting interactivity knowledge context both face-to-face However, rotating thous...

Interfaces for supporting public discussion on the web confound speaking and listening. We argue that we can design interfaces that make it easier for discussants/collaborators to find common ground by better engaging the motivations of listeners, and, in turn, help facilitate more meaningful large-scale discussions. In this paper, we (1) call attention to the potential of listening as a practi...

This note is a rejoinder to comments by Dubois and Moral about my paper “Likelihood-based belief function: justification and some extensions to low-quality data” published in this issue. The main comments concern (1) the axiomatic justification for defining a consonant belief function in the parameter space from the likelihood function and (2) the Bayesian treatment of statistical inference fro...