Skip to main content
Log in

Elicited Data and Incorporation of Expert Opinion for Statistical Inference in Spatial Studies

  • Published:
Mathematical Geology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Spatial data are often sparse by nature. However, in many instances, information may exist in the form of “soft” data, such as expert opinion. Scientists in the field often have a good understanding of the phenomenon under study and may be able to provide valuable information on its likely behavior. It is thus useful to have a sensible mechanism that incorporates expert opinion in inference. The Bayesian paradigm suffers from an inherent subjectivity that is unacceptable to many scientists. Aside from this philosophical problem, elicitation of prior distributions is a difficult task. Moreover, an intentionally misleading expert can have substantial influence on Bayesian inference. In our experience, eliciting data is much more natural to the experts than eliciting prior distributions on the parameters of a probability model that is a purely statistical construct. In this paper we elicit data, i.e., guess values for the realization of the process, from the experts. Utilizing a hierarchical modeling framework, we combine elicited data and actual observed data for inferential purposes. A distinguishing feature of this approach is that even an intentionally misleading expert proves to be useful. Theoretical results and simulations illustrate that incorporating expert opinion via elicited data substantially improves the estimation, prediction, and design aspects of statistical inference for spatial data.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Benedetti, R., and Palma, D., 1995, Optimal sampling designs for dependent spatial units: Environmetrics, no. 6, p. 101–114.

  • Breslow, N. E., and Clayton, D. G., 1993, Approximate inference in generalized linear mixed models: Journal of the American Statistical Association, v. 88, no. 421, p. 9–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christakos, G., and Killam, B. R., 1993, Sampling design for classifying contaminant level using annealing search algorithms: Water Resources Res., v. 29, no. 12, p. 4063–4076.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cressie, N., 1988, Spatial prediction and ordinary kriging: Math. Geology, v. 20, no. 4, p. 405–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cressie, N., 1993, Statistics for spatial data: John Wiley & Sons, New York, 900 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cressie, N., Gotway, C. A., and Grondona, M., 1990, Spatial prediction from networks: Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, no. 7, p. 251–271.

  • Das, A., 1998, Topics in spatial statistics: Unpubl. doctoral dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, 157 p.

  • Dennis, B., 1996, Discussion: Should ecologists become Bayesians?: Ecological Applications, v. 6, no. 4, p. 1095–1103.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeGroot, M. H., 1988, A Bayesian view of assessing uncertainty and comparing expert opinion: Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, no. 20, p. 295–306.

  • Efron, B., 1986, Why isn't everyone a Bayesian? (with discussion): The American Statistician, v. 40, no. 1, p. 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Efron, B., 1996, Empirical Bayes methods for combining likelihoods (with discussion): Journal of the American Statistical Association, v. 91, no. 434, p. 538–565.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garthwaite, P. H., and Dickey, J. M., 1992, Elicitation of prior distributions for variable selection problems in regression: Annals of Statistics, no. 20, p. 1697–1719.

  • Genest, C., and Zidek, J. V., 1986, Combining probability distributions: A critique and an annotated bibliography: Statistical Science, no. 1, p. 114–135.

  • Hastings, W. K., 1970, Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications: Biometrika, no. 57, p. 97–109.

  • Journel, A. G., 1986, Constrained interpolation and qualitative information-The soft kriging approach: Math. Geology, v. 18, no. 3, p. 269–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulkarni, R. B., 1984, Bayesian kriging in geotechnical problems, in Verly, G., ed., Geostatistics for Natural Resources Characterization Part 2: D. Reidel Publishing Company, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. M., and Ellis, J. H., 1996, Groundwater monitoring network design: Algorithms for nonlinear integer optimization: ASCE Journal of Environmental Engineering, v. 122, no. 6, p. 524–531.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayo, D. G., 1996, Error and growth of experimental knowledge: University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 494 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCulloch, C. E., 1997, Maximum likelihood algorithms for generalized linear mixed models: Journal of the American Statistical Association, v. 92, no. 437, p. 162–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royall, R. M., 1997, Statistical evidence: A likelihood paradigm: Chapman & Hall, London, 191 p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffey, D., 1992, Hierarchical Bayesian modeling with elicited prior information: Communications in Statistics A, no. 21, p. 799–821.

  • von Mises, R., 1943, On the correct use of Bayes' formula: Annals of Mathematical Statistics, no. 14, p. 156–165.

  • West, M., 1988, Modelling expert opinion, in Bernardo, J. M., DeGroot, M. H., Lindley, D. V., and Smith, A. F. M., eds., Bayesian Statistics 3: Oxford University Press, New York, p. 493–508.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lele, S.R., Das, A. Elicited Data and Incorporation of Expert Opinion for Statistical Inference in Spatial Studies. Mathematical Geology 32, 465–487 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007525900030

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007525900030

Navigation