Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42421736›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Choosing informative priors in Bayesian regression models: a simulation study and tutorial using Stan and R.

Daniel Lüdecke, Anna C Makowski, Jens Klein, Mattan S Ben-Shachar, Dominique Makowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Daniel LüdeckeInstitute of Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Anna C MakowskiInstitute of Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Jens KleinInstitute of Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Mattan S Ben-ShacharIndependent Researcher, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Dominique MakowskiSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Bayesian regression models provide a robust framework for complex data analysis, which is particularly advantageous in scenarios with small sample sizes, common in psychology or medical research. However, specifying appropriate prior distributions that incorporate existing knowledge to regularize model parameters remains a challenge for many researchers. This can lead to unstable or implausible estimates. This study aims to demonstrate the impact of different prior distributions on regression models and to provide a practical guide for choosing and justifying informative priors to produce more stable and credible results. Methods: The study involved two parts. First, a simulation study was conducted to systematically assess the sensitivity of Bayesian linear regression models to prior specification. We systematically varied the sample size, prior location, and prior scale to observe their impact on posterior estimates for a known true effect size. Second, a case-control study using real-world patient data ( Results: The simulation study showed that strongly informative priors had a substantial influence on posterior estimates, particularly for smaller sample sizes. As the sample size increased, the influence of the data increased, and the estimates converged toward the true effect. In the case-control study, a standard frequentist logistic regression produced an odds ratio of 8.87 with a very wide and unstable confidence interval (1.66-165.19), likely due to data sparsity. In contrast, a Bayesian model using a moderately informative "believer" prior derived from existing research yielded a more stable and plausible odds ratio of 4.01 with a substantially narrower credible interval (1.99-8.78). Conclusion: Careful and transparent specification of informative priors is a critical tool in Bayesian analysis, especially when data are sparse. By incorporating justified evidence-based assumptions, researchers can regularize models to prevent implausible outcomes and produce more stable, interpretable, and credible results. This approach enhances the robustness of statistical inference in fields where small sample sizes are a frequent challenge.

Indexed as

Bayesian statisticsinformative priorsprior elicitationsimulation studysmall sample size

Identifiers

PMID42421736
PMCPMC13341808

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.