andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-592 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: John Cook links to a blog by Ben Deaton arguing that people often waste time trying to set up ideal working conditions, even though (a) your working conditions will never be ideal, and (b) the sorts of constraints and distractions that one tries to avoid, can often stimulate new ideas. Deaton seems like my kind of guy–for one thing, he works on nonlinear finite element analysis, which is one of my longstanding interests–and in many ways his points are reasonable and commonsensical (I have little doubt, for example, that Feynman made a good choice in staying clear of the Institute for Advanced Study!), but I have a couple of points of disagreement. 1. In my experience, working conditions can make a difference. And once you accept this, it could very well make sense to put some effort into improving your work environment. I like to say that I spent twenty years reconstructing what it felt like to be in grad school. My ideal working environment has lots of people coming in
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 John Cook links to a blog by Ben Deaton arguing that people often waste time trying to set up ideal working conditions, even though (a) your working conditions will never be ideal, and (b) the sorts of constraints and distractions that one tries to avoid, can often stimulate new ideas. [sent-1, score-0.965]
2 In my experience, working conditions can make a difference. [sent-5, score-0.329]
3 And once you accept this, it could very well make sense to put some effort into improving your work environment. [sent-6, score-0.129]
4 I like to say that I spent twenty years reconstructing what it felt like to be in grad school. [sent-7, score-0.082]
5 My ideal working environment has lots of people coming in and out, lots of opportunities for discussion, planned and otherwise. [sent-8, score-0.63]
6 So I think Deaton is wrong to generalize to “don’t spend time trying to keep a very clean work environment” to “don’t spend time trying to get a setup that works for you. [sent-10, score-0.605]
7 I like to feel that the efforts I put into my work environment have positive spillovers on others–the people I work with, the other people they work with, etc. [sent-13, score-0.693]
8 , also as setting an example for others in the department. [sent-14, score-0.08]
9 In contrast, people who want super-clean work conditions (the sort of thing that Deaton, rightly, is suspicious of) can impose negative externalities on others. [sent-15, score-0.566]
10 For example, one of the faculty in my department once removed my course listings from the department webpage. [sent-16, score-0.407]
11 I never got a straight answer on why this happened, but I assumed it was because he didn’t like what he taught, and it offended his sensibilities to see these courses listed. [sent-17, score-0.172]
12 Removing the listing had the advantage from his perspective of cleanliness (I assume) but negatively impacted potential students and others who might have been interested in our course offerings. [sent-18, score-0.388]
13 That is an extreme case, but I think many of us have experienced work environments in which intellectual interactions are discouraged in some way. [sent-19, score-0.348]
14 Deaton concludes by asking his readers, “How ideal is ideal enough for you to do something great? [sent-22, score-0.593]
15 ” I agree with his point that there are diminishing returns to optimization and that you shouldn’t let difficulties with our workplace stop us from doing good work (unless, of course, you’re working somewhere where your employer gets possession of everything you do). [sent-23, score-0.672]
16 But I am wary of his implicit statement that “you” (whoever you are) can “do something great. [sent-24, score-0.147]
17 ” I think we should all try to do our best, and I’m sure that almost all of us are capable of doing good work. [sent-25, score-0.149]
18 But is everyone out there really situated in a place where he or she can “do something great”? [sent-26, score-0.155]
19 Doing something “great” is a fine aspiration, but I wonder if some of this go-for-it advice can backfire for the people out there who really aren’t in a position to achieve greatness. [sent-28, score-0.309]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('deaton', 0.567), ('ideal', 0.26), ('conditions', 0.187), ('environment', 0.15), ('working', 0.142), ('work', 0.129), ('advanced', 0.113), ('institute', 0.112), ('backfire', 0.094), ('sensibilities', 0.094), ('possession', 0.094), ('externalities', 0.094), ('department', 0.089), ('feynman', 0.085), ('impacted', 0.085), ('listings', 0.085), ('doubt', 0.085), ('reconstructing', 0.082), ('situated', 0.082), ('trying', 0.082), ('spend', 0.082), ('great', 0.081), ('course', 0.08), ('others', 0.08), ('discouraged', 0.08), ('workplace', 0.08), ('greatness', 0.08), ('rightly', 0.08), ('capable', 0.078), ('offended', 0.078), ('employer', 0.078), ('impose', 0.078), ('diminishing', 0.078), ('people', 0.078), ('works', 0.076), ('longstanding', 0.076), ('staying', 0.074), ('stimulate', 0.074), ('negatively', 0.074), ('wary', 0.074), ('something', 0.073), ('element', 0.073), ('setup', 0.072), ('us', 0.071), ('listing', 0.069), ('environments', 0.068), ('removing', 0.068), ('whoever', 0.067), ('removed', 0.064), ('achieve', 0.064)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0000001 592 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-26-“Do you need ideal conditions to do great work?”
Introduction: John Cook links to a blog by Ben Deaton arguing that people often waste time trying to set up ideal working conditions, even though (a) your working conditions will never be ideal, and (b) the sorts of constraints and distractions that one tries to avoid, can often stimulate new ideas. Deaton seems like my kind of guy–for one thing, he works on nonlinear finite element analysis, which is one of my longstanding interests–and in many ways his points are reasonable and commonsensical (I have little doubt, for example, that Feynman made a good choice in staying clear of the Institute for Advanced Study!), but I have a couple of points of disagreement. 1. In my experience, working conditions can make a difference. And once you accept this, it could very well make sense to put some effort into improving your work environment. I like to say that I spent twenty years reconstructing what it felt like to be in grad school. My ideal working environment has lots of people coming in
2 0.10893326 426 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-22-Postdoc opportunity here at Columbia — deadline soon!
Introduction: The deadline for this year’s Earth Institute postdocs is 1 Dec, so it’s time to apply right away ! It’s a highly competitive interdisciplinary program, and we’ve had some statisticians in the past. We’re particularly interested in statisticians who have research interests in development and public health. It’s fine–not just fine, but ideal–if you are interested in statistical methods also.
3 0.10495825 937 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-02-That advice not to work so hard
Introduction: We often hear that at the end of life, people often wish they hadn’t worked so hard. (I’m assuming this is coming from executive types who have the option of working less, not people who had to work hard just to put food on the table.) I don’t understand this. Work is ok, but in almost any moment I much prefer relaxing to working. Nonetheless I often wish I were working harder or had worked harder. I don’t feel that I work too much. So I don’t know what to think. Am I just unusual? Or maybe I already don’t work so hard, so there’s nothing for me to regret? Or—and this is the scary option—maybe right now I wish I were working harder, but in twenty years I’ll regret that I spent so much time working? Here’s one thing. I like almost all the research papers I’ve written, but the vast majority (including some of my favorites) have had very few citations and, I assume, very little impact. So maybe I worked too hard on some of them?
4 0.10048272 2287 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-09-Advice: positive-sum, zero-sum, or negative-sum
Introduction: There’s a lot of free advice out there. I offer some of it myself! As I’ve written before (see this post from 2008 reacting to this advice from Dan Goldstein for business school students, and this post from 2010 reacting to some general advice from Nassim Taleb), what we see is typically presented as advice to individuals, but it’s also interesting to consider the possible total effects if the advice is taken. It’s time to play the game again. This time it’s advice from sociologist Fabio Rojas for Ph.D. students. I’ll copy his eight points of advice, then, for each, evaluate whether I think it is positive or negative sum: 1. Show up. Even if you feel horrible, show up. No matter what. Period. Unless someone died in your family, show up. 2. Do your job. Grade the papers. Do the lab work. Unless the work is extreme, take it in stride. 3. Be completely realistic about how you will be evaluated from day #1 – acquire a teaching record and a record of publication. Don’t h
5 0.098054357 395 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-Consulting: how do you figure out what to charge?
Introduction: I’m a physicist by training, statistical data analyst by trade. Although some of my work is pretty standard statistical analysis, more often I work somewhere in a gray area that includes physics, engineering, and statistics. I have very little formal statistics training but I do study in an academic-like way to learn techniques from the literature when I need to. I do some things well but there are big gaps in my stats knowledge compared to anyone who has gone to grad school in statistics. On the other hand, there are big gaps in most statisticians’ physics and engineering knowledge compared to anyone who has gone to grad school in physics. Generally my breadth and depth of knowledge is about right for the kind of work that I do, I think. But last week I was offered a consulting job that might be better done by someone with more conventional stats knowledge than I have. The job involves gene expression in different types of tumors, so it’s “biostatistics” by definition, but the
6 0.094524026 571 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-13-A departmental wiki page?
7 0.093159623 971 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-25-Apply now for Earth Institute postdoctoral fellowships at Columbia University
8 0.091475531 1520 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-03-Advice that’s so eminently sensible but so difficult to follow
9 0.090729132 1611 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-07-Feedback on my Bayesian Data Analysis class at Columbia
10 0.089146458 390 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-02-Fragment of statistical autobiography
11 0.085942298 430 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-25-The von Neumann paradox
12 0.08488211 1848 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-09-A tale of two discussion papers
13 0.082299992 1832 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-29-The blogroll
14 0.08086025 1764 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-15-How do I make my graphs?
16 0.07921315 2009 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-05-A locally organized online BDA course on G+ hangout?
18 0.078987487 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote
19 0.078753002 1527 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-10-Another reason why you can get good inferences from a bad model
20 0.078593537 2279 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-02-Am I too negative?
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.192), (1, -0.065), (2, -0.046), (3, 0.021), (4, 0.023), (5, 0.03), (6, 0.042), (7, 0.026), (8, 0.002), (9, 0.027), (10, -0.028), (11, -0.011), (12, 0.016), (13, -0.055), (14, -0.025), (15, -0.008), (16, -0.007), (17, -0.001), (18, -0.003), (19, 0.02), (20, 0.025), (21, -0.007), (22, -0.02), (23, 0.034), (24, -0.014), (25, -0.016), (26, -0.024), (27, -0.004), (28, -0.023), (29, 0.045), (30, -0.004), (31, -0.006), (32, -0.028), (33, -0.009), (34, 0.018), (35, -0.041), (36, -0.035), (37, 0.009), (38, -0.043), (39, -0.016), (40, 0.042), (41, -0.002), (42, -0.011), (43, -0.014), (44, 0.02), (45, -0.026), (46, -0.021), (47, 0.021), (48, -0.008), (49, 0.046)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.97105587 592 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-26-“Do you need ideal conditions to do great work?”
Introduction: John Cook links to a blog by Ben Deaton arguing that people often waste time trying to set up ideal working conditions, even though (a) your working conditions will never be ideal, and (b) the sorts of constraints and distractions that one tries to avoid, can often stimulate new ideas. Deaton seems like my kind of guy–for one thing, he works on nonlinear finite element analysis, which is one of my longstanding interests–and in many ways his points are reasonable and commonsensical (I have little doubt, for example, that Feynman made a good choice in staying clear of the Institute for Advanced Study!), but I have a couple of points of disagreement. 1. In my experience, working conditions can make a difference. And once you accept this, it could very well make sense to put some effort into improving your work environment. I like to say that I spent twenty years reconstructing what it felt like to be in grad school. My ideal working environment has lots of people coming in
2 0.88232118 2287 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-09-Advice: positive-sum, zero-sum, or negative-sum
Introduction: There’s a lot of free advice out there. I offer some of it myself! As I’ve written before (see this post from 2008 reacting to this advice from Dan Goldstein for business school students, and this post from 2010 reacting to some general advice from Nassim Taleb), what we see is typically presented as advice to individuals, but it’s also interesting to consider the possible total effects if the advice is taken. It’s time to play the game again. This time it’s advice from sociologist Fabio Rojas for Ph.D. students. I’ll copy his eight points of advice, then, for each, evaluate whether I think it is positive or negative sum: 1. Show up. Even if you feel horrible, show up. No matter what. Period. Unless someone died in your family, show up. 2. Do your job. Grade the papers. Do the lab work. Unless the work is extreme, take it in stride. 3. Be completely realistic about how you will be evaluated from day #1 – acquire a teaching record and a record of publication. Don’t h
Introduction: After posting on David Rubinstein’s remarks on his “cushy life” as a sociology professor at a public university, I read these remarks by some of Rubinstein’s colleagues at the University of Illinois, along with a response from Rubinstein. Before getting to the policy issues, let me first say that I think it must have been so satisfying, first for Rubinstein and then for his colleagues (Barbara Risman, William Bridges, and Anthony Orum) to publish these notes. We all have people we know and hate, but we rarely have a good excuse for blaring our feelings in public. (I remember when I was up for tenure, I was able to read the outside letters on my case (it’s a public university and they have rules), and one of the letter writers really hated my guts. I was surprised–I didn’t know the guy well (the letters were anonymized but it was clear from context who the letter writer was) but the few times we’d met, he’d been cordial enough–but there you have it. He must have been thrilled t
4 0.85698736 970 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-24-Bell Labs
Introduction: Sining Chen told me they’re hiring in the statistics group at Bell Labs . I’ll do my bit for economic stimulus by announcing this job (see below). I love Bell Labs. I worked there for three summers, in a physics lab in 1985-86 under the supervision of Loren Pfeiffer, and by myself in the statistics group in 1990. I learned a lot working for Loren. He was a really smart and driven guy. His lab was a small set of rooms—in Bell Labs, everything’s in a small room, as they value the positive externality of close physical proximity of different labs, which you get by making each lab compact—and it was Loren, his assistant (a guy named Ken West who kept everything running in the lab), and three summer students: me, Gowton Achaibar, and a girl whose name I’ve forgotten. Gowtan and I had a lot of fun chatting in the lab. One day I made a silly comment about Gowton’s accent—he was from Guyana and pronounced “three” as “tree”—and then I apologized and said: Hey, here I am making fun o
5 0.85454386 2313 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-30-Seth Roberts
Introduction: I met Seth back in the early 1990s when we were both professors at the University of California. He sometimes came to the statistics department seminar and we got to talking about various things; in particular we shared an interest in statistical graphics. Much of my work in this direction eventually went toward the use of graphical displays to understand fitted models. Seth went in another direction and got interested in the role of exploratory data analysis in science, the idea that we could use graphs not just to test or even understand a model but also as the source of new hypotheses. We continued to discuss these issues over the years; see here , for example. At some point when we were at Berkeley the administration was encouraging the faculty to teach freshman seminars, and I had the idea of teaching a course on left-handedness. I’d just read the book by Stanley Coren and thought it would be fun to go through it with a class, chapter by chapter. But my knowledge of psych
6 0.85382557 937 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-02-That advice not to work so hard
7 0.84492546 1520 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-03-Advice that’s so eminently sensible but so difficult to follow
8 0.84317786 395 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-Consulting: how do you figure out what to charge?
9 0.83857554 1277 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-23-Infographic of the year
10 0.83818269 390 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-02-Fragment of statistical autobiography
11 0.83722454 2070 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-20-The institution of tenure
13 0.83461481 1261 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-12-The Naval Research Lab
14 0.83378077 740 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-01-The “cushy life” of a University of Illinois sociology professor
15 0.83092839 2053 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-06-Ideas that spread fast and slow
16 0.83053815 835 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-02-“The sky is the limit” isn’t such a good thing
17 0.83037406 732 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-26-What Do We Learn from Narrow Randomized Studies?
18 0.82333481 88 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-15-What people do vs. what they want to do
19 0.82244289 578 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-17-Credentialism, elite employment, and career aspirations
20 0.82213223 1453 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-10-Quotes from me!
topicId topicWeight
[(9, 0.033), (15, 0.022), (16, 0.051), (20, 0.134), (21, 0.059), (22, 0.014), (24, 0.12), (42, 0.012), (69, 0.013), (86, 0.026), (95, 0.013), (99, 0.338)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.97879827 480 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-21-Instead of “confidence interval,” let’s say “uncertainty interval”
Introduction: I’ve become increasingly uncomfortable with the term “confidence interval,” for several reasons: - The well-known difficulties in interpretation (officially the confidence statement can be interpreted only on average, but people typically implicitly give the Bayesian interpretation to each case), - The ambiguity between confidence intervals and predictive intervals. (See the footnote in BDA where we discuss the difference between “inference” and “prediction” in the classical framework.) - The awkwardness of explaining that confidence intervals are big in noisy situations where you have less confidence, and confidence intervals are small when you have more confidence. So here’s my proposal. Let’s use the term “uncertainty interval” instead. The uncertainty interval tells you how much uncertainty you have. That works pretty well, I think. P.S. As of this writing, “confidence interval” outGoogles “uncertainty interval” by the huge margin of 9.5 million to 54000. So we
2 0.96959895 479 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-20-WWJD? U can find out!
Introduction: Two positions open in the statistics group at the NYU education school. If you get the job, you get to work with Jennifer HIll! One position is a postdoctoral fellowship, and the other is a visiting professorship. The latter position requires “the demonstrated ability to develop a nationally recognized research program,” which seems like a lot to ask for a visiting professor. Do they expect the visiting prof to develop a nationally recognized research program and then leave it there at NYU after the visit is over? In any case, Jennifer and her colleagues are doing excellent work, both applied and methodological, and this seems like a great opportunity.
Introduction: Gur Huberman points to an article on the financial crisis by Bethany McLean, who writes : lthough our understanding of what instigated the 2008 global financial crisis remains at best incomplete, there are a few widely agreed upon contributing factors. One of them is a 2004 rule change by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that allowed investment banks to load up on leverage. This disastrous decision has been cited by a host of prominent economists, including Princeton professor and former Federal Reserve Vice-Chairman Alan Blinder and Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz. It has even been immortalized in Hollywood, figuring into the dark financial narrative that propelled the Academy Award-winning film Inside Job. . . . Here’s just one problem with this story line: It’s not true. Nor is it hard to prove that. Look at the historical leverage of the big five investment banks — Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. The Government Accou
4 0.96474677 974 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-26-NYC jobs in applied statistics, psychometrics, and causal inference!
Introduction: The Center for the Promotion of Research Involving Innovative Statistical Methodology at the Steinhardt School of Education has two job openings ! One is for an assistant/associated tenure track position for an applied statistician or psychometrician. The other is for a postdoc in causal inference and sensitivity analysis. Jennifer Hill and Marc Scott at the Steinhardt school are just great! We’re working together on various research projects so if you manage to get one of these jobs maybe you can collaborate with us here at Columbia too. So I have every interest in encouraging the very best people to apply for these jobs.
5 0.9640224 1270 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-19-Demystifying Blup
Introduction: In our recent thread on computing hierarchical models with big datasets, someone brought up Blup. I thought it might be worth explaining what Blup is and how it relates to hierarchical models. Blup stands for Best Linear Unbiased Prediction, but in my terminology it’s just hierarchical modeling. Let me break it down: - “Best” doesn’t really matter. What’s important is that our estimates and predictions make sense and are as accurate as possible. - “Linear” isn’t so important. Statistical predictions are linear for Gaussian linear models, otherwise not. We can and do perform hierarchical generalized linear models all the time. - “Unbiased” doesn’t really matter (see discussion of “Best,” above). - “Prediction” is the key word for relating Blup and hierarchical modeling to classical statistical terminology. In classical statistics, “estimation” of a parameter theta is evaluated conditional on the true value of theta, whereas “prediction” of a predictive quantity phi is eval
6 0.96121991 1937 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-13-Meritocracy rerun
same-blog 7 0.95929557 592 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-26-“Do you need ideal conditions to do great work?”
8 0.95893919 900 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-11-Symptomatic innumeracy
9 0.95492083 246 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-31-Somewhat Bayesian multilevel modeling
10 0.95290321 1629 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-18-It happened in Connecticut
11 0.95193285 910 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-15-Google Refine
12 0.95159554 831 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-30-A Wikipedia riddle!
13 0.95150858 1287 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-28-Understanding simulations in terms of predictive inference?
14 0.94911367 270 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-12-Comparison of forecasts for the 2010 congressional elections
15 0.94857901 254 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-04-Bayesian inference viewed as a computational approximation to classical calculations
16 0.94856226 1400 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-29-Decline Effect in Linguistics?
17 0.94339049 1912 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-24-Bayesian quality control?
18 0.94051945 2181 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-21-The Commissar for Traffic presents the latest Five-Year Plan
19 0.93979555 391 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-03-Some thoughts on election forecasting
20 0.93880653 467 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-14-Do we need an integrated Bayesian-likelihood inference?