Why Bayesian Psychologists Should Change the Way They Use the Bayes Factor

Publication date

2016-01-02

Authors

Hoijtink, HerbertISNI 0000000389542756
van Kooten, Pascal
Hulsker, Koenraad

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article
Open Access logo

License

taverne

Abstract

The discussion following Bem’s (2011) psi research highlights that applications of the Bayes factor in psychological research are not without problems. The first problem is the omission to translate subjective prior knowledge into subjective prior distributions. In the words of Savage (1961): “they make the Bayesian omelet without breaking the Bayesian egg.” The second problem occurs if the Bayesian egg is not broken: the omission to choose default prior distributions such that the ensuing inferences are well calibrated. The third problem is the adherence to inadequate rules for the interpretation of the size of the Bayes factor. The current paper will elaborate these problems and show how to avoid them using the basic hypotheses and statistical model used in the first experiment described in Bem (2011). It will be argued that a thorough investigation of these problems in the context of more encompassing hypotheses and statistical models is called for if Bayesian psychologists want to add a well-founded Bayes factor to the tool kit of psychological researchers.

Keywords

Bayes factor, calibrated Bayes, default prior distributions, frequency calculations, subjective prior distribution, Taverne, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Statistics and Probability, Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Citation

Hoijtink, H, van Kooten, P & Hulsker, K 2016, 'Why Bayesian Psychologists Should Change the Way They Use the Bayes Factor', Multivariate Behavioral Research, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 2-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2014.969364