This question has been bothering me for a while. Wading through the internet hasn't turned up any answers that I have been able to understand.
First some motivation: Let $S = \{s_1,s_2,s_3\}$ be a set and consider a random variable $x \in S$ with distribution $p(x=s_i) = p_i$. Suppose that we have an observable $f$ with $f(s_1) = f(s_2) = \lambda$ and $f(s_3) = \mu$. If we measure $f = \lambda$, then the distribution of $x$ collapses to a vector proportional to $(p_1,p_2,0)$. This is just a convoluted way of stating Bayes rule.
Now suppose that $x \in S$ is a "quantum particle". It is specified by a wave function $\psi(s_i) = a_i \in \mathbb{C}$. Consider the observable $$f = \begin{pmatrix} \lambda & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & \lambda & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & \mu \end{pmatrix}.$$ If we measure $f = \lambda$, then the wave function $\psi$ should collapse to something. It seems reasonable to take something proportional to $(a_1,a_2,0)$ in accordance with Bayes rule, but I have never seen anyone explicitly say this. Is this correct?