Parameter Restrictions for the Sake of Identification: Is There Utility in Asserting That Perhaps a Restriction Holds?

Statistical modeling can involve a tension between assumptions and statistical identification. The law of the observable data may not uniquely determine the value of a target parameter without invoking a key assumption, and, while plausible, this assumption may not be obviously true in the scientific context at hand. Moreover, there are many instances of key assumptions which are untestable, hence we cannot rely on the data to resolve the question of whether the target is legitimately identified. Working in the Bayesian paradigm, we consider the grey zone of situations where a key assumption, in the form of a parameter space restriction, is scientifically reasonable but not incontrovertible for the problem being tackled. Specifically, we investigate statistical properties that ensue if we structure a prior distribution to assert that `maybe' or `perhaps' the assumption holds. Technically this simply devolves to using a mixture prior distribution putting just some prior weight on the assumption, or one of several assumptions, holding. However, while the construct is straightforward, there is very little literature discussing situations where Bayesian model averaging is employed across a mix of fully identified and partially identified models.