Hypothesized and Confounded Explanations in Theory Tests: A Bayesian Analysis

David Brinberg, Lynch, John G, and Alan G Sawyer

Journal of Consumer Research, 1992, vol. 19, issue 2, 139-54

Abstract: Traditional views of research methodology hold that little, if any, useful information can be obtained from one or more confounded studies, unless the results from one study rule out or falsify an alternative explanation from a previous study. We present a Bayesian analysis of hypothesis testing to model knowledge accumulation from a series of confounded or unconfounded experiments. By applying this Bayesian analysis, we find that a hypothesis can receive support from a study with known flaws. Our analysis also implies that the status of an explanation is independent of whether it was proposed a priori or post hoc. Copyright 1992 by the University of Chicago.

Date: 1992
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/209293 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:19:y:1992:i:2:p:139-54

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Consumer Research is currently edited by Bernd Schmitt, June Cotte, Markus Giesler, Andrew Stephen and Stacy Wood

More articles in Journal of Consumer Research from Journal of Consumer Research Inc.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().