- Calibrated Bayes Factors Should Not Be Used
- A Reply to Hoijtink, van Kooten, and Hulsker
- Multivariate Behavioral Research
- Volume | Issue number
- 51 | 1
- Pages (from-to)
- Document type
- Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences (FMG)
- Psychology Research Institute (PsyRes)
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.
- go to publisher's site
- Other links
- Link to publication in Scopus
If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library, or send a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.