Paper detail

Assessing replication success via skeptical mixture priors

There is a growing interest in the analysis of replication studies of original findings across many disciplines. When testing a hypothesis for an effect size, two Bayesian approaches stand out for their principled use of the Bayes factor (BF), namely the replication BF and the skeptical BF. In particular, the latter BF is based on the skeptical prior, which represents the opinion of an investigator who is unconvinced by the original findings and wants to challenge them. We embrace the skeptical perspective, and elaborate a novel mixture prior which incorporates skepticism while at the same time controlling for prior-data conflict within the original data. Consistency properties of the resulting skeptical mixture BF are provided together with an extensive analysis of the main features of our proposal. Finally, we apply our methodology to data from the Social Sciences Replication Project. In particular we show that, for some case studies where prior-data conflict is an issue, our method uses a more realistic prior and leads to evidence-classification for replication success which differs from the standard skeptical approach.

preprint2023arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.