No, I don't think I can make any inferences about psychiatry from those articles. My Bayesian update is the opposite of yours: because the evidence presented was weak, I'm more skeptical of any relationship between psychiatry and divorce. I was quite ready to believe it, and was disappointed to see such weak studies. It suggests to me that it's difficult to find positive results with stronger analysis.
You seem to be suggesting I'm philosophically a Frequentist. Somewhat true, but I am, like basically everyone, a Bayesian when it comes to practical decisions. Also, I have no fear of logical deduction when statistical inference is infeasible.
Nullism is a good term. I'm of the opinion that most things are random and that humans' imaginations frequently mislead us. Absent better evidence, I'm unlikely to believe any link between psychiatry and divorce.
You seem to be suggesting I'm philosophically a Frequentist. Somewhat true, but I am, like basically everyone, a Bayesian when it comes to practical decisions. Also, I have no fear of logical deduction when statistical inference is infeasible.
Nullism is a good term. I'm of the opinion that most things are random and that humans' imaginations frequently mislead us. Absent better evidence, I'm unlikely to believe any link between psychiatry and divorce.