Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An alternative to model selection in ordinary regression

  • Published:
Statistics and Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The weaknesses of established model selection procedures based on hypothesis testing and similar criteria are discussed and an alternative based on synthetic (composite) estimation is proposed. It is developed for the problem of prediction in ordinary regression and its properties are explored by simulations for the simple regression. Extensions to a general setting are described and an example with multiple regression is analysed. Arguments are presented against using a selected model for any inferences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Berger J.O. and Pericchi L.R. 1996. The intrinsic Bayes factor for linear models. In: Bernardo J.M., Berger J.O., Dawid A.P., and Smith A.F.M. (Eds.), Bayesian Statistics vol. 5, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 25–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempster A.P., Laird N.M., and Rubin D.B. 1977. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Ser. B 39: 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Draper D. 1995. Assessment and propagation of model uncertainty. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Ser. B 57: 45–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • George E.I., and Foster D.P. 2000. Calibration and empirical Bayes variable selection. Biometrika 87: 731–747.

    Google Scholar 

  • George E.I. and McCulloch R.E. 1997. Approaches to Bayesian variable selection. Statistica Sinica 7: 339–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh M. and Rao J.N.K. 1994. Small area estimation: An appraisal. Statistical Science 9: 55–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hand D.J., Daley F., Lunn A.D., McConway K.J., and Ostrowski E. 1994. A Handbook of Small Data Sets. Chapman and Hall, London, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kass R.E. 1993. Bayes factors in practice. The Statistician 42: 551–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kass R.E. and Raftery A.E. 1995. Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association 90: 773–795.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longford N.T. 1999. Multivariate shrinkage estimation of small area means and proportions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Ser. A 162: 227–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longford N.T. 2001. Synthetic estimators with moderating influence. The carryover in crossover trials revisited. Statistics in Medicine 20: 3189–3203.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Hagan A. 1995. Fractional Bayes factors for model comparisons. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Ser. B 57: 99–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seber G.A.F. 1977. Linear Regression Analysis. Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. De Montfort University, Leicester, UK

    Nicholas T. Longford

Authors
  1. Nicholas T. Longford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Longford, N.T. An alternative to model selection in ordinary regression. Statistics and Computing 13, 67–80 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021995912647

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021995912647

Search

Navigation