Calibrated Bayes Factors Should Not Be Used A Reply to Hoijtink, van Kooten, and Hulsker

Authors
Publication date 2016
Journal Multivariate Behavioral Research
Volume | Issue number 51 | 1
Pages (from-to) 11-19
Organisations
  • Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences (FMG) - Psychology Research Institute (PsyRes)
Abstract

Hoijtink, Kooten, and Hulsker (2016) present a method for choosing the prior distribution for an analysis with Bayes factor that is based on controlling error rates, which they advocate as an alternative to our more subjective methods (Morey & Rouder, 2014; Rouder, Speckman, Sun, Morey, & Iverson, 2009; Wagenmakers, Wetzels, Borsboom, & van der Maas, 2011). We show that the method they advocate amounts to a simple significance test, and that the resulting Bayes factors are not interpretable. Additionally, their method fails in common circumstances, and has the potential to yield arbitrarily high Type II error rates. After critiquing their method, we outline the position on subjectivity that underlies our advocacy of Bayes factors.

Document type Article
Language English
Related dataset Calibrated Bayes Factors Should Not Be Used: A Reply to Hoijtink, van Kooten, and Hulsker
Published at https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2015.1052710
Other links https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84958793854
Permalink to this page
Back