Cited by 349Statistical Methods and InferenceStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceStatistical Methods and Applications

A Critique of the Bayesian Information Criterion for Model Selection

WEAKLIEM, DAVID L.·1999·Sociological Methods & Research

Abstract

The Bayesian information criterion (BIC) has become a popular criterion for model selection in recent years. The BIC is intended to provide a measure of the weight of evidence favoring one model over another, or Bayes factor. It has, however, some important drawbacks that are not widely recognized. First, Bayes factors depend on prior beliefs about the expected distribution of parameter values, and there is no guarantee that the Bayes factor implied by the BIC will be close to one calculated from a prior distribution that an observer would actually regard as appropriate. Second, to obtain the Bayes factors that follow from the BIC, investigators would have to vary their prior distributions depending on the marginal distributions of the variables and the nature of the hypothesis. Such variations seem unwarranted in principle and tend to make the BIC inclined to favor excessively simple models in practice. These points are illustrated by the analysis of several examples, and alternatives to use of the BIC are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0049124199027003002

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
WEAKLIEM, D. L.
Affiliations
University of Connecticut (US)
Corresponding author
WEAKLIEM, DAVID L.
Venue
Sociological Methods & Research
Published
1999-02
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
359-397
ISSN
  • 0049-1241 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8294
OpenAlex
W2010529280
Cited by
349
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 12
FWCI
15.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Sociological Methods & Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
Keywords
Bayesian information criterion, model selection, Bayes factor, prior distributions, model complexity, weight of evidence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review