Model Selection and Psychological Theory: A Discussion of the Differences Between the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC)

被引:1142
|
作者
Vrieze, Scott I. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Minnesota, Dept Psychol, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[2] Minneapolis VA Med Ctr, Minneapolis, MN USA
关键词
Akaike information criterion; Bayesian information criterion; model selection; factor analysis; theory testing; LATENT CLASSES; APPROXIMATIONS; DIMENSION; CHOICE; INDEX;
D O I
10.1037/a0027127
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
This article reviews the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) in model selection and the appraisal of psychological theory. The focus is on latent variable models, given their growing use in theory testing and construction. Theoretical statistical results in regression are discussed, and more important issues are illustrated with novel simulations involving latent variable models including factor analysis, latent profile analysis, and factor mixture models. Asymptotically, the BIC is consistent, in that it will select the true model if, among other assumptions, the true model is among the candidate models considered. The AIC is not consistent under these circumstances. When the true model is not in the candidate model set the AIC is efficient, in that it will asymptotically choose whichever model minimizes the mean squared error of prediction/estimation. The BIC is not efficient under these circumstances. Unlike the BIC, the AIC also has a minimax property, in that it can minimize the maximum possible risk in finite sample sizes. In sum, the AIC and BIC have quite different properties that require different assumptions, and applied researchers and methodologists alike will benefit from improved understanding of the asymptotic and finite-sample behavior of these criteria. The ultimate decision to use the AIC or BIC depends on many factors, including the loss function employed, the study's methodological design, the substantive research question, and the notion of a true model and its applicability to the study at hand.
引用
收藏
页码:228 / 243
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] THE USE OF AKAIKE INFORMATION CRITERION AND BAYESIAN INFORMATION CRITERION RULES OF THUMB IN NICE ONCOLOGY APPRAISALS: A TARGETED REVIEW
    Bungey, G.
    Brown, L.
    De Boisvilliers, S.
    Teloian, D.
    Hardy, A.
    Guerrero-Luduena, R.
    Peter, B.
    Xiao, Y.
    Benedict, A.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2022, 25 (01) : S171 - S171
  • [22] Improved Bayesian information criterion for mixture model selection
    Mehrjou, Arash
    Hosseini, Reshad
    Araabi, Babak Nadjar
    PATTERN RECOGNITION LETTERS, 2016, 69 : 22 - 27
  • [23] Comments on "A critique of the Bayesian information criterion for model selection"
    Firth, D
    Kuha, J
    SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS & RESEARCH, 1999, 27 (03) : 398 - 402
  • [24] Assessing risk factors of human complex diseases by Akaike and Bayesian information criteria (AIC and BIC).
    Li, W
    Sherriff, A
    Liu, X
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2000, 67 (04) : 222 - 222
  • [25] A Bayesian information criterion for portfolio selection
    Lan, Wei
    Wang, Hansheng
    Tsai, Chih-Ling
    COMPUTATIONAL STATISTICS & DATA ANALYSIS, 2012, 56 (01) : 88 - 99
  • [26] An Akaike-type information criterion for model selection under inequality constraints
    Kuiper, R. M.
    Hoijtink, H.
    Silvapulle, M. J.
    BIOMETRIKA, 2011, 98 (02) : 495 - 501
  • [28] The Akaike Information Criterion Will Not Choose the No Common Mechanism Model
    Holder, Mark T.
    Lewis, Paul O.
    Swofford, David L.
    SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY, 2010, 59 (04) : 477 - 485
  • [29] Model selection and model averaging in phylogenetics: Advantages of akaike information criterion and Bayesian approaches over likelihood ratio tests
    Posada, D
    Buckley, TR
    SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY, 2004, 53 (05) : 793 - 808
  • [30] THE ESTIMATION OF SMOOTH OPERATION TIME UNTIL FAILURE WITH THE APPLICATION OF THE AKAIKE INFORMATION CRITERION (AIC)
    Kornacki, Andrzej
    Sokolowska, Ewa
    EKSPLOATACJA I NIEZAWODNOSC-MAINTENANCE AND RELIABILITY, 2010, (01): : 69 - 76