When estimating parameters such as (I don't care about this specific instance particularly) Variance of a random variable X, one usually adopts Bessel's correction, i.e. using the formula $\hat{Var}{(X)} = \frac{1}{n-1}\sum_i^n(x_i -\bar{x})^2$.
The justification given on Wikipedia and on all other sources I've found is either of the nature of:
- the $n-1$ factor arises from dividing by the degrees of freedom of the residual terms
- the $n-1$ factor ensures unbiasedness
- the $n-1$ factor arises to correct from underestimating the variance if we weren't to include it
However, why does it make sense to divide by the degrees of freedom?
In general, it seems pretty common to divide parameter estimates not by $n$, the number of sample points used to calculate them, but by $df$. Why does this generally make sense?
EDIT: to clarify my question, what I'm asking is whether in a general setting dividing a an uncorrected estimate by it's degrees of freedom will produce a unbiased estimator or an estimator with desirable properties. It seems like this procedure is common but I have not seen a general proof (and don't know if it exists) of why this would work generally.
In particular, I think that the reason would be probably in terms of dimensions of subspaces or connecting back to the degrees of freedom of distributions (that seems closely related).
For individual estimates like sample variance or the MLR residual standard error $\frac{RSS}{n- k-1}$ I am aware that proofs of unbiasedness exist, but they are specific to the problem at hand.