Abstract
AbstractA frequentist confidence interval can be constructed by inverting a hypothesis test, such that the interval contains only parameter values that would not have been rejected by the test. We show how a similar definition can be employed to construct a Bayesian support interval. Consistent with Carnap’s theory of corroboration, the support interval contains only parameter values that receive at least some minimum amount of support from the data. The support interval is not subject to Lindley’s paradox and provides an evidence-based perspective on inference that differs from the belief-based perspective that forms the basis of the standard Bayesian credible interval.
Funder
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference34 articles.
1. Bartlett, M. S. (1957). A comment on D. V. Lindley’s statistical paradox. Biometrika, 44, 533–534.
2. Baskurt, Z., Evans, M., et al. (2013). Hypothesis assessment and inequalities for bayes factors and relative belief ratios. Bayesian Analysis, 8(3), 569–590.
3. Carnap, R. (1950). Logical foundations of probability. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
4. Cumming, G. (2014). The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science, 25, 7–29.
5. DeGroot, M. H. (1982). Lindley’s paradox: Comment. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 77, 336–339.
Cited by
19 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献