This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Resolving some paradoxes and problems with Bayesian precise hypothesis testing

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Jeffrey A. Mills ()
Abstract

Bayesian hypothesis testing of a precise null hypothesis suffers from a paradox discovered by Jeffreys (1939), Lindley (1957) and Bartlett (1957). This paradox appears to indicate that the usual priors, both proper and improper, are inappropriate for testing precise null hypotheses, and lead to difficulties in specifying prior distributions that could be widely accepted as appropriate in this situation. This paper considers an alternative hypothesis testing procedure and derives the Bayes factor for this procedure, which turns out to be B = p(?0 | x)/sup?[p(?i | x)], the ratio of the posterior density function evaluated at the value in the null hypothesis, ?0, and evaluated at its supremum. This leads to a Bayesian hypothesis testing procedure in which the Jeffreys-Lindley-Bartlett paradox does not occur. Further, under the proposed procedure, the prior does not depend on the hypotheses to be tested, there is no need to place non-zero mass on a particular point in a continuous distribution, and the same hypothesis testing procedure applies for all continuous and discrete distributions. Further, the resulting test procedure is robust to reasonable variations in the prior, uniformly most powerful and easy to interpret correctly in practice. Several examples are given to illustrate the use and performance of the test. A justification for the proposed procedure is given based on the argument that scientific inference always at least implicitly involves and requires precise alternative working hypotheses.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.artsci.uc.edu/collegedepts/economics/research/docs/Wppdf/2009-01.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by University of Cincinnati, Department of Economics in its series University of Cincinnati, Economics Working Papers Series with number 2009-01.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision: 2009
Handle: RePEc:cin:ucecwp:2009-01

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Cincinnati, OH 45221-0371
Phone: (513) 556-2670
Fax: (513) 556-2669
Email:
Web page: http://asweb.artsci.uc.edu/economics/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Claude Lopez).

Related research
Keywords:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. James Berger & Elías Moreno & Luis Pericchi & M. Bayarri & José Bernardo & Juan Cano & Julián Horra & Jacinto Martín & David Ríos-Insúa & Bruno Betrò & A. Dasgupta & Paul Gustafson & Larry Wass, 1994. "An overview of robust Bayesian analysis," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 5-124, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS was launched in September 1997.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-22.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.