↓ Skip to main content

Bayesian inference for psychology, part IV: parameter estimation and Bayes factors

Overview of attention for article published in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 Mendeley
Title
Bayesian inference for psychology, part IV: parameter estimation and Bayes factors
Published in
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, February 2018
DOI 10.3758/s13423-017-1420-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeffrey N. Rouder, Julia M. Haaf, Joachim Vandekerckhove

Abstract

In the psychological literature, there are two seemingly different approaches to inference: that from estimation of posterior intervals and that from Bayes factors. We provide an overview of each method and show that a salient difference is the choice of models. The two approaches as commonly practiced can be unified with a certain model specification, now popular in the statistics literature, called spike-and-slab priors. A spike-and-slab prior is a mixture of a null model, the spike, with an effect model, the slab. The estimate of the effect size here is a function of the Bayes factor, showing that estimation and model comparison can be unified. The salient difference is that common Bayes factor approaches provide for privileged consideration of theoretically useful parameter values, such as the value corresponding to the null hypothesis, while estimation approaches do not. Both approaches, either privileging the null or not, are useful depending on the goals of the analyst.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 197 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 22%
Researcher 30 15%
Student > Master 19 10%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 12 6%
Other 42 21%
Unknown 33 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 84 43%
Neuroscience 16 8%
Linguistics 10 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 3%
Other 28 14%
Unknown 47 24%