The Bayesian and frequentist approaches to testing a one-sided hypothesis about a multivariate mean

This paper compares the Bayesian and frequentist approaches to testing a one-sided hypothesis about a multivariate mean. First, this paper proposes a simple way to assign a Bayesian posterior probability to one-sided hypotheses about a multivariate mean. The approach is to use (almost) the exact posterior probability under the assumption that the data has multivariate normal distribution, under either a conjugate prior in large samples or under a vague Jeffreys prior. This is also approximately the Bayesian posterior probability of the hypothesis based on a suitably flat Dirichlet process prior over an unknown distribution generating the data. Then, the Bayesian approach and a frequentist approach to testing the one-sided hypothesis are compared, with results that show a major difference between Bayesian reasoning and frequentist reasoning. The Bayesian posterior probability can be substantially smaller than the frequentist p-value. A class of example is given where the Bayesian posterior probability is basically 0, while the frequentist p-value is basically 1. The Bayesian posterior probability in these examples seems to be more reasonable. Other drawbacks of the frequentist p-value as a measure of whether the one-sided hypothesis is true are also discussed.