andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-668 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: The following is an essay into a topic I know next to nothing about. As part of our endless discussion of Dilbert and Charlie Sheen, commenter Fraac linked to a blog by philosopher Edouard Machery, who tells a fascinating story : How do we think about the intentional nature of actions? And how do people with an impaired mindreading capacity think about it? Consider the following probes: The Free-Cup Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy the largest sized drink available. Before ordering, the cashier told him that if he bought a Mega-Sized Smoothie he would get it in a special commemorative cup. Joe replied, ‘I don’t care about a commemorative cup, I just want the biggest smoothie you have.’ Sure enough, Joe received the Mega-Sized Smoothie in a commemorative cup. Did Joe intentionally obtain the commemorative cup? The Extra-Dollar Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Consider the following probes: The Free-Cup Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy the largest sized drink available. [sent-4, score-1.21]
2 Before ordering, the cashier told him that if he bought a Mega-Sized Smoothie he would get it in a special commemorative cup. [sent-5, score-0.51]
3 Joe replied, ‘I don’t care about a commemorative cup, I just want the biggest smoothie you have. [sent-6, score-0.895]
4 The Extra-Dollar Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy the largest sized drink available. [sent-9, score-1.21]
5 Before ordering, the cashier told him that the Mega-Sized Smoothies were now one dollar more than they used to be. [sent-10, score-0.446]
6 Joe replied, ‘I don’t care if I have to pay one dollar more, I just want the biggest smoothie you have. [sent-11, score-0.963]
7 You surely think that paying an extra dollar was intentional, while getting the commemorative cup was not. [sent-14, score-0.862]
8 Even after reading the description, it seems to me perfectly natural to think of the free cup as unintentional and the extra dollar as intentional. [sent-19, score-0.629]
9 But I also agree with the implicit point that, in a deeper sense, the choice to pay the extra dollar isn’t really more intentional than the choice to take the cup. [sent-20, score-0.516]
10 To engage in a bit of introspective reasoning (as is traditional in in the “heuristics and biases” field), I’d say the free cup just happened whereas in the second scenario Joe had to decide to pay the dollar. [sent-22, score-0.489]
11 The passive/active division correctly demarcates the free cup and extra dollar examples, but Machery presents other examples where both scenarios are passive, or where both scenarios are active, and you can get perceived intentionality or lack of intentionality in either case. [sent-24, score-1.078]
12 ” In the free-cup example there is no tradeoff (Joe gets the cup and his extra-large smoothie) hence no feeling of intentionality, whereas in the extra-dollar case there is a tradeoff (Joe gets his drink but has to pay more) hence it does feel intentional. [sent-30, score-0.749]
13 Consider the following two (hypothetical) new probes: The No-Free-Cup Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy the largest sized drink available. [sent-33, score-1.21]
14 Before ordering, the cashier told him that if he bought a Mega-Sized Smoothie he would no longer get it in a special commemorative cup. [sent-34, score-0.51]
15 Joe replied, ‘I don’t care about a commemorative cup, I just want the biggest smoothie you have. [sent-35, score-0.895]
16 The One-Less-Dollar Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy the largest sized drink available. [sent-38, score-1.21]
17 Before ordering, the cashier told him that the Mega-Sized Smoothies were now one dollar less than they used to be. [sent-39, score-0.446]
18 Joe replied, ‘I don’t care if I have to pay one dollar more, I just want the biggest smoothie you have. [sent-40, score-0.963]
19 To me, the key is that the cup is incidental but the cost of the smoothie is central. [sent-47, score-0.784]
20 Or maybe it’s that the cashier is giving Joe the cup whereas it’s Joe himself who’s paying. [sent-48, score-0.469]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('smoothie', 0.517), ('joe', 0.417), ('machery', 0.291), ('cup', 0.267), ('commemorative', 0.259), ('dollar', 0.236), ('intentionality', 0.194), ('cashier', 0.162), ('dehydrated', 0.129), ('intentional', 0.124), ('asperger', 0.118), ('drink', 0.105), ('sized', 0.103), ('shop', 0.095), ('pay', 0.091), ('intentionally', 0.088), ('ordering', 0.085), ('largest', 0.077), ('stopped', 0.074), ('biggest', 0.073), ('buy', 0.073), ('feeling', 0.072), ('extra', 0.065), ('probes', 0.065), ('smoothies', 0.065), ('local', 0.056), ('replied', 0.055), ('received', 0.05), ('told', 0.048), ('explanation', 0.048), ('care', 0.046), ('scenarios', 0.045), ('tradeoff', 0.043), ('bought', 0.041), ('whereas', 0.04), ('quite', 0.038), ('obtain', 0.036), ('paying', 0.035), ('free', 0.032), ('case', 0.032), ('linked', 0.03), ('regular', 0.03), ('decide', 0.03), ('unintentional', 0.029), ('counterexample', 0.029), ('introspective', 0.029), ('paid', 0.029), ('enough', 0.029), ('hence', 0.028), ('answer', 0.028)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 668 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-19-The free cup and the extra dollar: A speculation in philosophy
Introduction: The following is an essay into a topic I know next to nothing about. As part of our endless discussion of Dilbert and Charlie Sheen, commenter Fraac linked to a blog by philosopher Edouard Machery, who tells a fascinating story : How do we think about the intentional nature of actions? And how do people with an impaired mindreading capacity think about it? Consider the following probes: The Free-Cup Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy the largest sized drink available. Before ordering, the cashier told him that if he bought a Mega-Sized Smoothie he would get it in a special commemorative cup. Joe replied, ‘I don’t care about a commemorative cup, I just want the biggest smoothie you have.’ Sure enough, Joe received the Mega-Sized Smoothie in a commemorative cup. Did Joe intentionally obtain the commemorative cup? The Extra-Dollar Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy
2 0.088019058 928 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-27-Hey, look over here! Another rant!
Introduction: Bigshot establishment dude Peter Orszag thinks bigshot establishment dudes don’t have enough power. (Also politically related but not a rant: Joe McCarthy Versus Powerman and the Debt-Ceiling Destroyers, Part One. )
3 0.067910373 1465 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-21-D. Buggin
Introduction: Joe Zhao writes: I am trying to fit my data using the scaled inverse wishart model you mentioned in your book, Data analysis using regression and hierarchical models. Instead of using a uniform prior on the scale parameters, I try to use a log-normal distribution prior. However, I found that the individual coefficients don’t shrink much to a certain value even a highly informative prior (with extremely low variance) is considered. The coefficients are just very close to their least-squares estimations. Is it because of the log-normal prior I’m using or I’m wrong somewhere? My reply: If your priors are concentrated enough at zero variance, then yeah, the posterior estimates of the parameters should be pulled (almost) all the way to zero. If this isn’t happening, you got a problem. So as a start I’d try putting in some really strong priors concentrated at 0 (for example, N(0,.1^2)) and checking that you get a sensible answer. If not, you might well have a bug. You can also try
4 0.065794878 1816 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-21-Exponential increase in the number of stat majors
Introduction: Joe Blitztein sent around the following graph: (The x-axis goes from 2000 to 2012 and the y=axis goes from 0 to 120.) 100 statistics majors (this combines sophomores, juniors, and seniors, but still, that’s a lot more than the 1 or 2 or 3 a year we’re used to seeing). At first I was like, whoa! But then I thought, why not 100 or even 200 or 300 statistics majors? Statistics is important in itself, it’s relatively easy as far as quantitative majors go, it’s applicable to lots of other areas. The real question should be not, What’s been happening that’s made statistics so trendy lately? but rather, What took so long for this to happen, and why isn’t statistics more popular? Both places where I studied as an undergraduate, statistics was just a subset of the math department, and maybe the only reason I ended up in statistics is that I took a probability course one semester because, at 5pm, it fit my schedule.
5 0.062717631 1241 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-02-Fixed effects and identification
Introduction: Tom Clark writes: Drew Linzer and I [Tom] have been working on a paper about the use of modeled (“random”) and unmodeled (“fixed”) effects. Not directly in response to the paper, but in conversations about the topic over the past few months, several people have said to us things to the effect of “I prefer fixed effects over random effects because I care about identification.” Neither Drew nor I has any idea what this comment is supposed to mean. Have you come across someone saying something like this? Do you have any thoughts about what these people could possibly mean? I want to respond to this concern when people raise it, but I have failed thus far to inquire what is meant and so do not know what to say. My reply: I have a “cultural” reply, which is that so-called fixed effects are thought to make fewer assumptions, and making fewer assumptions is considered a generally good thing that serious people do, and identification is considered a concern of serious people, so they g
6 0.06146517 1325 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-17-More on the difficulty of “preaching what you practice”
7 0.060318146 77 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-09-Sof[t]
8 0.05992049 1505 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-20-“Joseph Anton”
9 0.056935225 1417 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-15-Some decision analysis problems are pretty easy, no?
10 0.052981123 137 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-10-Cost of communicating numbers
11 0.049923077 2249 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-15-Recently in the sister blog
12 0.049838915 1989 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-20-Correcting for multiple comparisons in a Bayesian regression model
13 0.046613455 922 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-24-Economists don’t think like accountants—but maybe they should
14 0.045761533 1081 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-24-Statistical ethics violation
15 0.045330551 1192 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-02-These people totally don’t know what Chance magazine is all about
16 0.043468181 1250 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-07-Hangman tips
17 0.042631309 2286 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-08-Understanding Simpson’s paradox using a graph
18 0.041005511 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote
19 0.039945148 308 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-30-Nano-project qualifying exam process: An intensified dialogue between students and faculty
20 0.039649159 1442 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-03-Double standard? Plagiarizing journos get slammed, plagiarizing profs just shrug it off
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.07), (1, -0.026), (2, 0.003), (3, 0.008), (4, -0.014), (5, -0.008), (6, 0.03), (7, -0.001), (8, 0.013), (9, 0.007), (10, -0.026), (11, -0.011), (12, 0.011), (13, 0.001), (14, -0.0), (15, -0.001), (16, 0.011), (17, -0.009), (18, -0.001), (19, 0.009), (20, 0.011), (21, -0.003), (22, 0.019), (23, 0.016), (24, -0.006), (25, 0.006), (26, 0.0), (27, 0.003), (28, -0.014), (29, 0.013), (30, 0.006), (31, 0.003), (32, 0.004), (33, 0.003), (34, -0.004), (35, -0.014), (36, -0.016), (37, 0.004), (38, -0.014), (39, 0.008), (40, 0.015), (41, -0.015), (42, -0.033), (43, 0.005), (44, -0.003), (45, 0.014), (46, -0.003), (47, -0.007), (48, 0.002), (49, -0.008)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.93968165 668 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-19-The free cup and the extra dollar: A speculation in philosophy
Introduction: The following is an essay into a topic I know next to nothing about. As part of our endless discussion of Dilbert and Charlie Sheen, commenter Fraac linked to a blog by philosopher Edouard Machery, who tells a fascinating story : How do we think about the intentional nature of actions? And how do people with an impaired mindreading capacity think about it? Consider the following probes: The Free-Cup Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy the largest sized drink available. Before ordering, the cashier told him that if he bought a Mega-Sized Smoothie he would get it in a special commemorative cup. Joe replied, ‘I don’t care about a commemorative cup, I just want the biggest smoothie you have.’ Sure enough, Joe received the Mega-Sized Smoothie in a commemorative cup. Did Joe intentionally obtain the commemorative cup? The Extra-Dollar Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy
Introduction: Sandeep Baliga writes : [In a recent study , Gilles Duranton and Matthew Turner write:] For interstate highways in metropolitan areas we [Duranton and Turner] find that VKT (vehicle kilometers traveled) increases one for one with interstate highways, confirming the fundamental law of highway congestion.’ Provision of public transit also simply leads to the people taking public transport being replaced by drivers on the road. Therefore: These findings suggest that both road capacity expansions and extensions to public transit are not appropriate policies with which to combat traffic congestion. This leaves congestion pricing as the main candidate tool to curb traffic congestion. To which I reply: Sure, if your goal is to curb traffic congestion . But what sort of goal is that? Thinking like a microeconomist, my policy goal is to increase people’s utility. Sure, traffic congestion is annoying, but there must be some advantages to driving on that crowded road or pe
Introduction: Ever since I got this new sound system for my bike, I’ve been listening to a lot of podcasts. This American Life is really good. I know, I know, everybody knows that, but it’s true. The only segments I don’t like are the ones that are too “writerly,” when they read a short story aloud. They don’t work for me. Most of the time, though, the show is as great as everyone says it is. Anyway, the other day I listened to program #466: Blackjack . It started with some items on card counting. That stuff is always fun. Then they get to the longer story, which is all about a moderately rich housewife from Iowa who, over a roughly ten-year period, lost her life savings, something like a million dollars, at Harrah’s casinos. Did you know they had casinos in Iowa and Indiana? I didn’t. Anyway, the lady was a gambling addict. That part’s pretty clear. You don’t lose your life savings at a casino by accident. The scary part, though, was how the casino company craftily enabled her to
4 0.82355243 525 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-19-Thiel update
Introduction: A year or so ago I discussed the reasoning of zillionaire financier Peter Thiel, who seems to believe his own hype and, worse, seems to be able to convince reporters of his infallibility as well. Apparently he “possesses a preternatural ability to spot patterns that others miss.” More recently, Felix Salmon commented on Thiel’s financial misadventures: Peter Thiel’s hedge fund, Clarium Capital, ain’t doing so well. Its assets under management are down 90% from their peak, and total returns from the high point are -65%. Thiel is smart, successful, rich, well-connected, and on top of all that his calls have actually been right . . . None of that, clearly, was enough for Clarium to make money on its trades: the fund was undone by volatility and weakness in risk management. There are a few lessons to learn here. Firstly, just because someone is a Silicon Valley gazillionaire, or any kind of successful entrepreneur for that matter, doesn’t mean they should be trusted with oth
5 0.82230371 1850 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-10-The recursion of pop-econ
Introduction: Dave Berri posted the following at the Freakonomics blog: The “best” picture of 2012 was Argo. At least that’s the film that won the Oscar for best picture. According to the Oscars, the decision to give this award to Argo was made by the nearly 6,000 voting members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. . . . In other words, this choice is made by the “experts.” There is, though, another group that we could have listened to on Sunday night. That group would be the people who actually spend money to go to the movies. . . . According to that group, Marvel’s the Avengers was the “best” picture in 2012. With domestic revenues in excess of $600 million, this filmed earned nearly $200 million more than any other picture. And when we look at world-wide revenues, this film brought in more than $1.5 billion. . . . Despite what seems like a clear endorsement by the customers of this industry, the Avengers was ignored by the Oscars. Perhaps this is just because I am an econo
6 0.80994225 1003 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-11-$
7 0.80092001 1536 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-16-Using economics to reduce bike theft
8 0.79844421 1410 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-09-Experimental work on market-based or non-market-based incentives
9 0.79583395 221 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-21-Busted!
10 0.79579115 487 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-27-Alfred Kahn
11 0.79415148 420 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-18-Prison terms for financial fraud?
12 0.78970629 1105 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-08-Econ debate about prices at a fancy restaurant
13 0.78933573 191 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-08-Angry about the soda tax
14 0.78860772 2010 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-06-Would today’s captains of industry be happier in a 1950s-style world?
15 0.78377634 1479 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-01-Mothers and Moms
16 0.78121877 2123 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-04-Tesla fires!
17 0.78090703 335 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-11-How to think about Lou Dobbs
18 0.77858704 1010 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-14-“Free energy” and economic resources
19 0.77503139 713 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-15-1-2 social scientist + 1-2 politician = ???
20 0.77255505 1037 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-01-Lamentably common misunderstanding of meritocracy
topicId topicWeight
[(5, 0.02), (15, 0.036), (16, 0.068), (24, 0.111), (43, 0.01), (47, 0.021), (53, 0.015), (62, 0.311), (76, 0.095), (96, 0.013), (99, 0.111)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.83280987 668 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-19-The free cup and the extra dollar: A speculation in philosophy
Introduction: The following is an essay into a topic I know next to nothing about. As part of our endless discussion of Dilbert and Charlie Sheen, commenter Fraac linked to a blog by philosopher Edouard Machery, who tells a fascinating story : How do we think about the intentional nature of actions? And how do people with an impaired mindreading capacity think about it? Consider the following probes: The Free-Cup Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy the largest sized drink available. Before ordering, the cashier told him that if he bought a Mega-Sized Smoothie he would get it in a special commemorative cup. Joe replied, ‘I don’t care about a commemorative cup, I just want the biggest smoothie you have.’ Sure enough, Joe received the Mega-Sized Smoothie in a commemorative cup. Did Joe intentionally obtain the commemorative cup? The Extra-Dollar Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy
2 0.69091755 156 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-20-Burglars are local
Introduction: This makes sense: In the land of fiction, it’s the criminal’s modus operandi – his method of entry, his taste for certain jewellery and so forth – that can be used by detectives to identify his handiwork. The reality according to a new analysis of solved burglaries in the Northamptonshire region of England is that these aspects of criminal behaviour are on their own unreliable as identifying markers, most likely because they are dictated by circumstances rather than the criminal’s taste and style. However, the geographical spread and timing of a burglar’s crimes are distinctive, and could help with police investigations. And, as a bonus, more Tourette’s pride! P.S. On yet another unrelated topic from the same blog, I wonder if the researchers in this study are aware that the difference between “significant” and “not significant” is not itself statistically significant .
3 0.60858881 715 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-16-“It doesn’t matter if you believe in God. What matters is if God believes in you.”
Introduction: Mark Chaves sent me this great article on religion and religious practice: After reading a book or article in the scientific study of religion, I [Chaves] wonder if you ever find yourself thinking, “I just don’t believe it.” I have this experience uncomfortably often, and I think it’s because of a pervasive problem in the scientific study of religion. I want to describe that problem and how to overcome it. The problem is illustrated in a story told by Meyer Fortes. He once asked a rainmaker in a native culture he was studying to perform the rainmaking ceremony for him. The rainmaker refused, replying: “Don’t be a fool, whoever makes a rain-making ceremony in the dry season?” The problem is illustrated in a different way in a story told by Jay Demerath. He was in Israel, visiting friends for a Sabbath dinner. The man of the house, a conservative rabbi, stopped in the middle of chanting the prayers to say cheerfully: “You know, we don’t believe in any of this. But then in Judai
4 0.57403159 1082 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-25-Further evidence of a longstanding principle of statistics
Introduction: The principle is, Whatever you do, somebody in psychometrics already did it long before. The new evidence comes from an article by Lawrence Hubert and Howard Wainer: There are several issues with the use of ecological correlations: They tend to be a lot higher than individual-level correlations, and assuming what is seen at the group level also holds at the level of the individual is so pernicious, it has been labeled the “ecological fallacy” by Selvin (1958). The term ecological correlation was popularized from a 1950 article by William Robinson (Robinson, 1950), but the idea has been around for some time (e.g., see the 1939 article by E. L. Thorndike, On the Fallacy of Imputing Correlations Found for Groups to the Individuals or Smaller Groups Composing Them).
5 0.55160344 107 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-24-PPS in Georgia
Introduction: Lucy Flynn writes: I’m working at a non-profit organization called CRRC in the Republic of Georgia. I’m having a methodological problem and I saw the syllabus for your sampling class online and thought I might be able to ask you about it? We do a lot of complex surveys nationwide; our typical sample design is as follows: - stratify by rural/urban/capital - sub-stratify the rural and urban strata into NE/NW/SE/SW geographic quadrants - select voting precincts as PSUs - select households as SSUs - select individual respondents as TSUs I’m relatively new here, and past practice has been to sample voting precincts with probability proportional to size. It’s desirable because it’s not logistically feasible for us to vary the number of interviews per precinct with precinct size, so it makes the selection probabilities for households more even across precinct sizes. However, I have a complex sampling textbook (Lohr 1999), and it explains how complex it is to calculate sel
6 0.54955351 1414 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-12-Steven Pinker’s unconvincing debunking of group selection
7 0.51736361 260 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-07-QB2
8 0.50770313 704 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-10-Multiple imputation and multilevel analysis
9 0.50053644 986 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-01-MacKay update: where 12 comes from
10 0.49176705 2021 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-13-Swiss Jonah Lehrer
11 0.49155885 2082 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-30-Berri Gladwell Loken football update
12 0.48873886 1084 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-26-Tweeting the Hits?
13 0.48761114 988 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-02-Roads, traffic, and the importance in decision analysis of carefully examining your goals
14 0.48742038 1551 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-28-A convenience sample and selected treatments
15 0.48684323 1637 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-24-Textbook for data visualization?
16 0.48324454 1881 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-03-Boot
18 0.48121545 1139 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-26-Suggested resolution of the Bem paradox
19 0.47740886 2319 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-05-Can we make better graphs of global temperature history?
20 0.47692087 1206 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-10-95% intervals that I don’t believe, because they’re from a flat prior I don’t believe