Agresti and Hitchcock (2005) Bayesian Inference for Categorical Data Analysis

bayesiancategorical-dataempirical-bayeshierarchical-modelshrinkagegibbs-samplerlogistic-regressionprobitcontingency-tabledirichletliterature-survey

Summary

A comprehensive survey of Bayesian methods for analyzing categorical data, tracing developments from Bayes (1763) and Laplace (1774) through the Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) era. Organized by data structure — binomial and multinomial parameters, contingency table cell probabilities, loglinear models, and generalized linear models (GLMs) for binary and multi-category responses — the paper documents how conjugate beta-Dirichlet priors, Leonard's logit-normal hierarchy (1970s), and computationally tractable MCMC methods progressively unlocked fully Bayesian analysis for discrete data. A recurring theme is the shrinkage-toward-model character of Bayesian estimators and the practical difficulty of prior specification in non-conjugate settings.

Key Claims

Concepts Introduced or Extended

Entities Mentioned

Quotes

"The beta and logistic-normal priors sometimes do not provide sufficient flexibility." (p. 300)

"The ordinary P-value for Fisher's exact test corresponds to a Bayesian P-value with a conservative prior distribution, which some have taken to reflect the conservative nature of Fisher's exact test." (p. 314)

"Despite the advances summarized in this paper and the increasingly extensive literature, Bayesian inference does not seem to be commonly used yet in practice for basic categorical data analyses such as tests of independence and confidence intervals for association parameters." (p. 322)

My Take

A useful orientation to the categorical-data Bayesian literature, but tangential to this wiki's time-series/finance core. The most transferable ideas are: (1) the Altham-Fisher connection (P-values as Bayesian P-values under conservative priors) — a clean calibration result; (2) Leonard's logit-normal shrinkage as the conceptual precursor to the hierarchical probit work (Albert-Chib 1993b) already ingested; (3) the empirical Bayes / Laird (1978) approach as a historical foil to full Bayes. The claim in §7 about the practical gap remains true and is a useful reminder that having a rich methodology does not imply adoption. The survey predates Stan and brms; the software gap has since narrowed considerably.