“This behavior strikes us as ideal”: assessment and anticipations of Huisman (2022)

Open Access
Authors
Publication date 02-2024
Journal Psychonomic Bulletin and Review
Volume | Issue number 31 | 1
Pages (from-to) 242-248
Organisations
  • Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences (FMG) - Psychology Research Institute (PsyRes)
Abstract

Huisman (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1–10. 2022) argued that a valid measure of evidence should indicate more support in favor of a true alternative hypothesis when sample size is large than when it is small. Bayes factors may violate this pattern and hence Huisman concluded that Bayes factors are invalid as a measure of evidence. In this brief comment we call attention to the following: (1) Huisman’s purported anomaly is in fact dictated by probability theory; (2) Huisman’s anomaly has been discussed and explained in the statistical literature since 1939; the anomaly was also highlighted in the Psychonomic Bulletin & Review article by Rouder et al. (2009), who interpreted the anomaly as “ideal”: an interpretation diametrically opposed to that of Huisman. We conclude that when intuition clashes with probability theory, chances are that it is intuition that needs schooling.

Document type Article
Note With reference to: L. Huisman (2023) Are P-values and Bayes factors valid measures of evidential strength? In: Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, Vol. 30, pp. 932–941.
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-023-02299-x
Other links https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85166980007
Downloads
s13423-023-02299-x (Final published version)
Permalink to this page
Back