"Applied" vs "theoretical" statistics programs

[wittywonka]

I'm in the process of trying to figure out how "theoretical" or "applied" some of the top 20-25 statistics programs are, but I was hoping anyone with knowledge/experience in the field could help me narrow my general search? More specifically, I'm interested in programs generally considered more "applied" than "theoretical." I know that biostatistics programs will naturally tend to be more applied, but I'd still probably choose a more applied non-biostatistics statistics program over a more-theoretical biostatistics program... if that makes any sense.

 

Thanks in advance for your input.

[bayessays]

You'll probably have to be more specific as to what you are looking to do.  In a statistics PhD program, even "applied statistics" is still very mathematical.  Many programs will offer you the opportunity to do more applied work.  Are you looking for a less theoretical course sequence as well?  How theoretical do you want your dissertation to be?

 

For biostatistics programs, Washington (especially) and Hopkins are probably considered the more rigorous theoretical programs.  Once you get outside the top 6 (and even within some of the top 6), biostatistics programs are VERY applied.  If you're actually looking to apply statistics to problems more than developing new statistical theory and methodology, I would go for biostatistics.

[Biostat_Assistant_Prof]

What "Bayessays" said is good advice. Biostatistics programs will be more applied - dissertation work will still be a methodological contribution to the field, but not necsarily a big theoretical contribution (not sure how much that makes sense to someone not in the field yet) . Hopkins and Washington will be more theoretical than most other places - Liang and Zeger's GEE paper came out of Hopkins Biostats.

Biostatistics work will be motivated by biological/biomedical/public health problems. Look up past students dissertations to get an idea if you're interested, and compare Stats to Biostats departments

[wittywonka]

Thanks for the feedback.

 

At this time, I have no significant (pun intended) interest in developing new theories or proving new theorems. I would be much, much more interested in applying existing methods in novel, innovative ways.