Comment: The Inferential Information Criterion from a Bayesian Point of View

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY Sociological Methodology Pub Date : 2018-08-01 DOI:10.1177/0081175018794489
O. Vassend
{"title":"Comment: The Inferential Information Criterion from a Bayesian Point of View","authors":"O. Vassend","doi":"10.1177/0081175018794489","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"1. The Bayesian information criterion (BIC) has been proposed as a way to carry out Bayesian hypothesis testing when there are no clear expectations. However, the BIC rests on a particular prior distribution, for which there is rarely any justification. See Raftery (1995) on the case for the BIC and Weakliem (1999) for a critique. 2. The assumption that the sample is of the same size is important. To obtain the expected prediction error in a sample of arbitrary size, it is necessary to know the true model. Consequently, there is no method of model selection that uniformly leads to better out-of-sample predictions. 3. Schultz proposes that the value should be exp(AIC2 – AIC1), or about .0025 in this example. I think this is mistaken, and it should be exp{(AIC2 – AIC1)/2}. The general point about considering the theoretical probability of a nonzero value applies regardless of which formula is correct.","PeriodicalId":48140,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Methodology","volume":"48 1","pages":"91 - 97"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0081175018794489","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0081175018794489","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

1. The Bayesian information criterion (BIC) has been proposed as a way to carry out Bayesian hypothesis testing when there are no clear expectations. However, the BIC rests on a particular prior distribution, for which there is rarely any justification. See Raftery (1995) on the case for the BIC and Weakliem (1999) for a critique. 2. The assumption that the sample is of the same size is important. To obtain the expected prediction error in a sample of arbitrary size, it is necessary to know the true model. Consequently, there is no method of model selection that uniformly leads to better out-of-sample predictions. 3. Schultz proposes that the value should be exp(AIC2 – AIC1), or about .0025 in this example. I think this is mistaken, and it should be exp{(AIC2 – AIC1)/2}. The general point about considering the theoretical probability of a nonzero value applies regardless of which formula is correct.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评论:贝叶斯观点下的推理信息准则
1. 贝叶斯信息准则(BIC)是在没有明确期望的情况下进行贝叶斯假设检验的一种方法。然而,BIC依赖于一个特定的先验分布,很少有任何理由。参见Raftery(1995)对BIC和Weakliem(1999)案例的评论。2. 假设样本大小相同是很重要的。为了在任意大小的样本中获得预期的预测误差,必须知道真实的模型。因此,没有一种模型选择方法能均匀地导致更好的样本外预测。3.Schultz建议该值应该是exp(AIC2 - AIC1),或者在本例中约为0.0025。我认为这是错误的,它应该是exp{(AIC2 - AIC1)/2}。无论哪个公式是正确的,考虑非零值的理论概率的一般观点都适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Sociological Methodology is a compendium of new and sometimes controversial advances in social science methodology. Contributions come from diverse areas and have something useful -- and often surprising -- to say about a wide range of topics ranging from legal and ethical issues surrounding data collection to the methodology of theory construction. In short, Sociological Methodology holds something of value -- and an interesting mix of lively controversy, too -- for nearly everyone who participates in the enterprise of sociological research.
期刊最新文献
Using Relative Distribution Methods to Study Economic Polarization Across Categories and Contexts. Contextual Embeddings in Sociological Research: Expanding the Analysis of Sentiment and Social Dynamics Using Relative Distribution Methods to Study Economic Polarization across Categories and Contexts Can Human Reading Validate a Topic Model? Question-Order Effect in the Study of Satisfaction with Democracy: Lessons from Three Split-Ballot Experiments
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1