标题： 为何可选停止会对贝叶斯主义者造成问题 显示英文标题

标题： Why optional stopping can be a problem for Bayesians

摘要： 近年来，可选停止（optional stopping）已成为贝叶斯心理学界争论的话题。 Rouder（2014）认为，可选停止对贝叶斯主义者来说不是问题，甚至建议在实践中使用可选停止，Wagenmakers等人（2012）也持同样观点。 本文探讨了可选停止是否对贝叶斯方法构成问题，并明确了在何种情况以及何种意义上它会或不会成为问题。 通过稍微调整和扩展Rouder（2014）的实验，我们展示了，一旦感兴趣的参数配备了默认或实用先验（这意味着，在大多数贝叶斯因子假设检验的实际应用中），对可选停止的抗性可能会失效。 我们将三种类型的默认先验区分开来，每种先验在可选停止方面都有其特定的问题，从完全没有问题（Type 0先验）到相当严重（Type II先验）。 显示英文摘要

摘要： Recently, optional stopping has been a subject of debate in the Bayesian psychology community. Rouder (2014) argues that optional stopping is no problem for Bayesians, and even recommends the use of optional stopping in practice, as do Wagenmakers et al. (2012). This article addresses the question whether optional stopping is problematic for Bayesian methods, and specifies under which circumstances and in which sense it is and is not. By slightly varying and extending Rouder's (2014) experiments, we illustrate that, as soon as the parameters of interest are equipped with default or pragmatic priors - which means, in most practical applications of Bayes factor hypothesis testing - resilience to optional stopping can break down. We distinguish between three types of default priors, each having their own specific issues with optional stopping, ranging from no-problem-at-all (Type 0 priors) to quite severe (Type II priors).