andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-594 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: This was just bizarre. It’s an interview with Colin Camerer, a professor of finance and economics at Caltech, The topic is Camerer’s marriage, but what’s weird is that he doesn’t say anything specific about his wife at all. All we get are witticisms of the sub-Henny-Youngman level, for example, in response to the question, “Any free riding in your household?”, Camerer says: No. Here’s why: I am one of the world’s leading experts on psychology, the brain and strategic game theory. But my wife is a woman. So it’s a tie. Also some schoolyard evolutionary biology (“men signaling that they will help you raise your baby after conception, and women signaling fidelity” blah blah blah) and advice for husbands in “upper-class marriages with assets.” (No advice to the wives, but maybe that’s a good thing.) And here are his insights on love and marriage: Marriage is like hot slow-burning embers compared to the flashy flames of love. After the babies, the married brain has better thin
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 It’s an interview with Colin Camerer, a professor of finance and economics at Caltech, The topic is Camerer’s marriage, but what’s weird is that he doesn’t say anything specific about his wife at all. [sent-2, score-0.444]
2 All we get are witticisms of the sub-Henny-Youngman level, for example, in response to the question, “Any free riding in your household? [sent-3, score-0.063]
3 Here’s why: I am one of the world’s leading experts on psychology, the brain and strategic game theory. [sent-5, score-0.258]
4 Also some schoolyard evolutionary biology (“men signaling that they will help you raise your baby after conception, and women signaling fidelity” blah blah blah) and advice for husbands in “upper-class marriages with assets. [sent-8, score-0.977]
5 ” (No advice to the wives, but maybe that’s a good thing. [sent-9, score-0.072]
6 ) And here are his insights on love and marriage: Marriage is like hot slow-burning embers compared to the flashy flames of love. [sent-10, score-0.315]
7 After the babies, the married brain has better things to do–micromanage, focus on those babies, create comfort zones. [sent-11, score-0.164]
8 Marriage love can then burrow deeper, to the marrow. [sent-12, score-0.137]
9 Then maybe you’re burrowing through the skin and just to the surface of the bone, I guess. [sent-15, score-0.131]
10 It seems like a wasted opportunity, really: this dude could’ve shared insights from his research and discussed its applicability (or the limitations of its applicability) to love, a topic that everybody cares about. [sent-16, score-0.29]
11 (In contrast, another interview in this Economists in Love series, by Daniel Hamermesh, was much more to the point. [sent-17, score-0.187]
12 ) Yeah, sure, I’m a killjoy, the interview is just supposed to be fluff, etc. [sent-18, score-0.269]
13 Still, what kind of message are you sending when you define yourself as “one of the world’s leading experts on psychology” and define your wife as “a woman”? [sent-19, score-0.521]
14 Yes, I realize it’s supposed to be self-deprecating, but to me it comes off as self-deprecating along the lines of, “Yeah, my cat’s much smarter than I am. [sent-20, score-0.158]
15 ” I’m not talking about political correctness here. [sent-23, score-0.069]
16 I’m more worried about the hidden assumptions that can sap one’s research, as well as the ways in which subtle and interesting ideas in psychology can become entangled with various not-so-subtle, not-so-well-thought-out ideas on sex roles etc. [sent-24, score-0.174]
17 I’m being completely unfair to Camerer I have no idea how this interview was conducted but it could well have been done over the phone in ten minutes. [sent-25, score-0.349]
18 Basically, Camerer is a nice guy and when these reporters called him up to ask him some questions, he said, Sure, why not. [sent-26, score-0.079]
19 If I were interviewed without preparation and allowed to ramble, I’d say all sorts of foolish things too. [sent-28, score-0.126]
20 So basically I’m slamming Camerer for being nice enough to answer a phone call and then having the misfortune to see has casual thoughts spread all over the web (thanks to a link from Tyler Cowen, who really should’ve known better). [sent-29, score-0.396]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('camerer', 0.59), ('marriage', 0.21), ('blah', 0.199), ('wife', 0.189), ('interview', 0.187), ('signaling', 0.147), ('love', 0.137), ('applicability', 0.13), ('babies', 0.111), ('phone', 0.102), ('insights', 0.099), ('brain', 0.098), ('psychology', 0.098), ('yeah', 0.092), ('define', 0.086), ('killjoy', 0.084), ('supposed', 0.082), ('experts', 0.082), ('flashy', 0.079), ('colin', 0.079), ('schoolyard', 0.079), ('nice', 0.079), ('basically', 0.078), ('leading', 0.078), ('sap', 0.076), ('smarter', 0.076), ('misfortune', 0.076), ('eh', 0.076), ('wives', 0.076), ('marriages', 0.073), ('cries', 0.073), ('caltech', 0.073), ('advice', 0.072), ('correctness', 0.069), ('conception', 0.068), ('economics', 0.068), ('skin', 0.066), ('comfort', 0.066), ('cat', 0.066), ('couples', 0.065), ('surface', 0.065), ('preparation', 0.064), ('riding', 0.063), ('foolish', 0.062), ('mentions', 0.061), ('evolutionary', 0.061), ('wasted', 0.061), ('slamming', 0.061), ('whatever', 0.06), ('unfair', 0.06)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 594 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-28-Behavioral economics doesn’t seem to have much to say about marriage
Introduction: This was just bizarre. It’s an interview with Colin Camerer, a professor of finance and economics at Caltech, The topic is Camerer’s marriage, but what’s weird is that he doesn’t say anything specific about his wife at all. All we get are witticisms of the sub-Henny-Youngman level, for example, in response to the question, “Any free riding in your household?”, Camerer says: No. Here’s why: I am one of the world’s leading experts on psychology, the brain and strategic game theory. But my wife is a woman. So it’s a tie. Also some schoolyard evolutionary biology (“men signaling that they will help you raise your baby after conception, and women signaling fidelity” blah blah blah) and advice for husbands in “upper-class marriages with assets.” (No advice to the wives, but maybe that’s a good thing.) And here are his insights on love and marriage: Marriage is like hot slow-burning embers compared to the flashy flames of love. After the babies, the married brain has better thin
2 0.33840293 1578 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-15-Outta control political incorrectness
Introduction: Tyler Cowen points to an interview with economists Ronald Coase and Ning Wang: We are now working with the University of Chicago Press to launch a new journal, Man and the Economy. We chose our title carefully to signal the mission of the new journal, which is to restore economics to a study of man as he is and of the economy as it actually exists. “We chose our title carefully,” indeed. I’m reminded of a bizarrely-retro remark from a couple years ago by Colin (“at age 22″) Camerer. In response to the question, “Any free riding in your household?”, Camerer said: No. Here’s why: I am one of the world’s leading experts on psychology, the brain and strategic game theory. But my wife is a woman. So it’s a tie. One thing about being an economist, it gives you the ability to describe yourself as “one of the world’s leading experts on psychology.” What’s with these guys? My guess is that their social circle has a bit of a country-club locker-room feel, and they find it a
3 0.11957411 688 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-30-Why it’s so relaxing to think about social issues
Introduction: I was invited by the Columbia University residence halls to speak at an event on gay marriage. (I’ve assisted my colleagues Jeff Lax and Justin Phillips in their research on the topic.) The event sounded fun–unfortunately I’ll be out of town that weekend so can’t make it–but it got me thinking about how gay marriage and other social issues are so relaxing to think about because there’s no need for doubt. About half of Americans support same-sex marriage and about half oppose it. And the funny thing is, you can be absolutely certain in your conviction, from either direction. If you support, it’s a simple matter of human rights, and it’s a bit ridiculous to suppose that if gay marriage is allowed, it will somehow wreck all the straight marriages out there. Conversely, you can oppose on the clear rationale of wanting to keep marriage the same as it’s always been, and suggest that same-sex couples can be free to get together outside of marriage, as they always could. (Hey, it was g
Introduction: Gayle Laackmann reports ( link from Felix Salmon) that Microsoft, Google, etc. don’t actually ask brain-teasers in their job interviews. The actually ask a lot of questions about programming. (I looked here and was relieved to see that the questions aren’t very hard. I could probably get a job as an entry-level programmer if I needed to.) Laackmann writes: Let’s look at the very widely circulated “15 Google Interview Questions that will make you feel stupid” list [ here's the original list , I think, from Lewis Lin] . . . these questions are fake. Fake fake fake. How can you tell that they’re fake? Because one of them is “Why are manhole covers round?” This is an infamous Microsoft interview question that has since been so very, very banned at both companies . I find it very hard to believe that a Google interviewer asked such a question. We’ll get back to the manhole question in a bit. Lacakmann reports that she never saw any IQ tests in three years of interviewi
5 0.10331193 981 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-30-rms2
Introduction: In case you just can’t get enough, check out this amusing interview. The interview is from the year 2000 (I think) but it reads like it could’ve been done yesterday.
6 0.093093619 1537 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-17-100!
7 0.081035607 707 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-12-Human nature can’t be changed (except when it can)
8 0.080446482 1860 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-17-How can statisticians help psychologists do their research better?
9 0.078007735 1345 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-26-Question 16 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
10 0.077490196 224 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-22-Mister P gets married
11 0.076608844 1354 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-30-“I didn’t marry a horn, I married a man”
12 0.075132728 1586 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-21-Readings for a two-week segment on Bayesian modeling?
13 0.074491598 1296 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-03-Google Translate for code, and an R help-list bot
14 0.074024998 763 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-13-Inventor of Connect Four dies at 91
15 0.070930772 1819 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-23-Charles Murray’s “Coming Apart” and the measurement of social and political divisions
16 0.069562607 48 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-23-The bane of many causes
17 0.068647049 2245 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-12-More on publishing in journals
18 0.068390839 1832 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-29-The blogroll
19 0.06802877 1796 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-09-The guy behind me on line for the train . . .
20 0.067754634 395 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-Consulting: how do you figure out what to charge?
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.135), (1, -0.071), (2, -0.009), (3, 0.005), (4, 0.003), (5, 0.002), (6, 0.044), (7, 0.006), (8, 0.031), (9, 0.012), (10, -0.017), (11, -0.028), (12, 0.016), (13, 0.013), (14, -0.029), (15, -0.0), (16, 0.036), (17, -0.026), (18, 0.008), (19, 0.008), (20, -0.019), (21, -0.029), (22, 0.004), (23, -0.0), (24, 0.003), (25, 0.016), (26, -0.027), (27, -0.023), (28, -0.041), (29, -0.035), (30, 0.01), (31, 0.005), (32, -0.015), (33, -0.025), (34, 0.008), (35, -0.03), (36, -0.003), (37, 0.043), (38, -0.026), (39, 0.023), (40, 0.019), (41, 0.02), (42, 0.035), (43, 0.03), (44, -0.035), (45, 0.031), (46, 0.048), (47, -0.014), (48, 0.005), (49, 0.011)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.96128774 594 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-28-Behavioral economics doesn’t seem to have much to say about marriage
Introduction: This was just bizarre. It’s an interview with Colin Camerer, a professor of finance and economics at Caltech, The topic is Camerer’s marriage, but what’s weird is that he doesn’t say anything specific about his wife at all. All we get are witticisms of the sub-Henny-Youngman level, for example, in response to the question, “Any free riding in your household?”, Camerer says: No. Here’s why: I am one of the world’s leading experts on psychology, the brain and strategic game theory. But my wife is a woman. So it’s a tie. Also some schoolyard evolutionary biology (“men signaling that they will help you raise your baby after conception, and women signaling fidelity” blah blah blah) and advice for husbands in “upper-class marriages with assets.” (No advice to the wives, but maybe that’s a good thing.) And here are his insights on love and marriage: Marriage is like hot slow-burning embers compared to the flashy flames of love. After the babies, the married brain has better thin
2 0.86037743 1578 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-15-Outta control political incorrectness
Introduction: Tyler Cowen points to an interview with economists Ronald Coase and Ning Wang: We are now working with the University of Chicago Press to launch a new journal, Man and the Economy. We chose our title carefully to signal the mission of the new journal, which is to restore economics to a study of man as he is and of the economy as it actually exists. “We chose our title carefully,” indeed. I’m reminded of a bizarrely-retro remark from a couple years ago by Colin (“at age 22″) Camerer. In response to the question, “Any free riding in your household?”, Camerer said: No. Here’s why: I am one of the world’s leading experts on psychology, the brain and strategic game theory. But my wife is a woman. So it’s a tie. One thing about being an economist, it gives you the ability to describe yourself as “one of the world’s leading experts on psychology.” What’s with these guys? My guess is that their social circle has a bit of a country-club locker-room feel, and they find it a
Introduction: In response to my most recent post expressing bafflement over the Erving Goffman mystique, several commenters helped out by suggesting classic Goffman articles for me to read. Naturally, I followed the reference that had a link attached–it was for an article called Cooling the Mark Out, which analogized the frustrations of laid-off and set-aside white-collar workers to the reactions to suckers after being bilked by con artists. Goffman’s article was fascinating, but I was bothered by a tone of smugness. Here’s a quote from Cooling the Mark Out that starts on the cute side but is basically ok: In organizations patterned after a bureaucratic model, it is customary for personnel to expect rewards of a specified kind upon fulfilling requirements of a specified nature. Personnel come to define their career line in terms of a sequence of legitimate expectations and to base their self-conceptions on the assumption that in due course they will be what the institution allows persons t
4 0.77759022 1831 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-29-The Great Race
Introduction: This post is by Phil. Last summer my wife and I took a 3.5-month vacation that included a wide range of activities. When I got back, people would ask “what were the highlights or your trip?”, and I was somewhat at a loss: we had done so many things that were so different, many of which seemed really great…how could I pick? Someone said, wisely, that in six months or a year I’d be able to answer the question because some memories would be more vivid than others. They were right, and I was recently thinking back on our vacation and putting together a list of highlights — enjoyable in itself, but also worth doing to help plan future vacations. One of the things we did was go to four evenings of track and field events at the London Olympics. After we got back, people would ask what we had seen at the Olympics. I would say “We saw Usain Bolt run the 200m, we saw the women’s 4x100m relay and the men’s 4×400, we saw the last events of the decathlon…lots of great stuff. But my favorite was
5 0.7763508 321 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-05-Racism!
Introduction: Last night I spoke at the Columbia Club of New York, along with some of my political science colleagues, in a panel about politics, the economy, and the forthcoming election. The discussion was fine . . . until one guy in the audience accused us of bias based on what he imputed as our ethnicity. One of the panelists replied by asking the questioner what of all the things we had said was biased, and the questioner couldn’t actually supply any examples. It makes sense that the questioner couldn’t come up with a single example of bias on our part, considering that we were actually presenting facts . At some level, the questioner’s imputation of our ethnicity and accusation of bias isn’t so horrible. When talking with my friends, I engage in casual ethnic stereotyping all the time–hey, it’s a free country!–and one can certainly make the statistical argument that you can guess people’s ethnicities from their names, appearance, and speech patterns, and in turn you can infer a lot
7 0.76929671 2158 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-03-Booze: Been There. Done That.
8 0.76865566 707 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-12-Human nature can’t be changed (except when it can)
10 0.7653724 1882 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-03-The statistical properties of smart chains (and referral chains more generally)
11 0.76502132 1707 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-05-Glenn Hubbard and I were on opposite sides of a court case and I didn’t even know it!
13 0.76146472 2300 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-21-Ticket to Baaaath
14 0.75431889 1553 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-30-Real rothko, fake rothko
15 0.75331688 763 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-13-Inventor of Connect Four dies at 91
16 0.74983531 1190 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-29-Why “Why”?
17 0.74732155 430 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-25-The von Neumann paradox
18 0.74421126 489 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-28-Brow inflation
19 0.74023914 416 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-16-Is parenting a form of addiction?
20 0.73870695 688 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-30-Why it’s so relaxing to think about social issues
topicId topicWeight
[(3, 0.093), (9, 0.048), (16, 0.054), (21, 0.02), (24, 0.151), (36, 0.022), (42, 0.05), (45, 0.027), (53, 0.018), (55, 0.036), (63, 0.017), (86, 0.059), (95, 0.012), (96, 0.035), (99, 0.227)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.94647944 594 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-28-Behavioral economics doesn’t seem to have much to say about marriage
Introduction: This was just bizarre. It’s an interview with Colin Camerer, a professor of finance and economics at Caltech, The topic is Camerer’s marriage, but what’s weird is that he doesn’t say anything specific about his wife at all. All we get are witticisms of the sub-Henny-Youngman level, for example, in response to the question, “Any free riding in your household?”, Camerer says: No. Here’s why: I am one of the world’s leading experts on psychology, the brain and strategic game theory. But my wife is a woman. So it’s a tie. Also some schoolyard evolutionary biology (“men signaling that they will help you raise your baby after conception, and women signaling fidelity” blah blah blah) and advice for husbands in “upper-class marriages with assets.” (No advice to the wives, but maybe that’s a good thing.) And here are his insights on love and marriage: Marriage is like hot slow-burning embers compared to the flashy flames of love. After the babies, the married brain has better thin
Introduction: Jeff Leek just posted the discussions of his paper (with Leah Jager), “An estimate of the science-wise false discovery rate and application to the top medical literature,” along with some further comments of his own. Here are my original thoughts on an earlier version of their article. Keith O’Rourke and I expanded these thoughts into a formal comment for the journal. We’re pretty much in agreement with John Ioannidis (you can find his discussion in the top link above). In quick summary, I agree with Jager and Leek that this is an important topic. I think there are two key places where Keith and I disagree with them: 1. They take published p-values at face value whereas we consider them as the result of a complicated process of selection. This is something I didn’t used to think much about, but now I’ve become increasingly convinced that the problems with published p-values is not a simple file-drawer effect or the case of a few p=0.051 values nudged toward p=0.049, bu
3 0.90816087 498 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-02-Theoretical vs applied statistics
Introduction: Anish Thomas writes: I was wondering if you could provide me with some guidance regarding statistical training. My background is in Industrial/Organizational Psychology, with an emphasis on Quantitative Psychology and currently working in the employee selection industry. I am considering pursuing a masters degree in Statistics. As l look through several program options, I am curious about the real difference between theoretical and applied Statistics. It would be very enlightening if you could shed some light on the difference. Specifically: 1. Is theoretical side more mathematically oriented (i.e., theorems and proofs) than applied? 2. Are the skills acquired in a ‘theoretical’ class difficult to transfer to the ‘applied’ side and vice versa? 3. I see theoretical statistics as the part that engages in developing the methods and applied statistics as pure application of the methods. Is this perception completely off base? My reply: 1. The difference between theoretic
4 0.90702057 1578 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-15-Outta control political incorrectness
Introduction: Tyler Cowen points to an interview with economists Ronald Coase and Ning Wang: We are now working with the University of Chicago Press to launch a new journal, Man and the Economy. We chose our title carefully to signal the mission of the new journal, which is to restore economics to a study of man as he is and of the economy as it actually exists. “We chose our title carefully,” indeed. I’m reminded of a bizarrely-retro remark from a couple years ago by Colin (“at age 22″) Camerer. In response to the question, “Any free riding in your household?”, Camerer said: No. Here’s why: I am one of the world’s leading experts on psychology, the brain and strategic game theory. But my wife is a woman. So it’s a tie. One thing about being an economist, it gives you the ability to describe yourself as “one of the world’s leading experts on psychology.” What’s with these guys? My guess is that their social circle has a bit of a country-club locker-room feel, and they find it a
5 0.90681005 1208 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-11-Gelman on Hennig on Gelman on Bayes
Introduction: Deborah Mayo pointed me to this discussion by Christian Hennig of my recent article on Induction and Deduction in Bayesian Data Analysis. A couple days ago I responded to comments by Mayo, Stephen Senn, and Larry Wasserman. I will respond to Hennig by pulling out paragraphs from his discussion and then replying. Hennig: for me the terms “frequentist” and “subjective Bayes” point to interpretations of probability, and not to specific methods of inference. The frequentist one refers to the idea that there is an underlying data generating process that repeatedly throws out data and would approximate the assumed distribution if one could only repeat it infinitely often. Hennig makes the good point that, if this is the way you would define “frequentist” (it’s not how I’d define the term myself, but I’ll use Hennig’s definition here), then it makes sense to be a frequentist in some settings but not others. Dice really can be rolled over and over again; a sample survey of 15
6 0.90497351 1176 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-19-Standardized writing styles and standardized graphing styles
7 0.90476584 777 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-23-Combining survey data obtained using different modes of sampling
8 0.90274519 2161 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-07-My recent debugging experience
9 0.90238476 899 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-10-The statistical significance filter
10 0.90215051 788 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-06-Early stopping and penalized likelihood
11 0.90089804 1367 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-05-Question 26 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
12 0.89929128 2149 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-26-Statistical evidence for revised standards
13 0.89866734 2178 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-20-Mailing List Degree-of-Difficulty Difficulty
14 0.89809799 1881 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-03-Boot
15 0.89792776 1717 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-10-Psychology can be improved by adding some economics
16 0.89789522 678 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-25-Democrats do better among the most and least educated groups
18 0.89709568 830 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-29-Introductory overview lectures at the Joint Statistical Meetings in Miami this coming week
20 0.89593351 970 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-24-Bell Labs