andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-700 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining

700 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-06-Suspicious pattern of too-strong replications of medical research


meta infos for this blog

Source: html

Introduction: Howard Wainer writes in the Statistics Forum: The Chinese scientific literature is rarely read or cited outside of China. But the authors of this work are usually knowledgeable of the non-Chinese literature — at least the A-list journals. And so they too try to replicate the alpha finding. But do they? One would think that they would find the same diminished effect size, but they don’t! Instead they replicate the original result, even larger. Here’s one of the graphs: How did this happen? Full story here .


Summary: the most important sentenses genereted by tfidf model

sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore

1 Howard Wainer writes in the Statistics Forum: The Chinese scientific literature is rarely read or cited outside of China. [sent-1, score-1.049]

2 But the authors of this work are usually knowledgeable of the non-Chinese literature — at least the A-list journals. [sent-2, score-0.922]

3 And so they too try to replicate the alpha finding. [sent-3, score-0.753]

4 One would think that they would find the same diminished effect size, but they don’t! [sent-5, score-0.659]

5 Here’s one of the graphs: How did this happen? [sent-7, score-0.068]


similar blogs computed by tfidf model

tfidf for this blog:

wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)

[('replicate', 0.415), ('diminished', 0.288), ('knowledgeable', 0.264), ('literature', 0.252), ('wainer', 0.251), ('chinese', 0.238), ('alpha', 0.238), ('howard', 0.233), ('forum', 0.212), ('rarely', 0.196), ('cited', 0.188), ('outside', 0.16), ('happen', 0.143), ('size', 0.139), ('usually', 0.129), ('authors', 0.126), ('graphs', 0.126), ('full', 0.124), ('original', 0.123), ('result', 0.12), ('scientific', 0.114), ('instead', 0.11), ('effect', 0.101), ('try', 0.1), ('story', 0.094), ('least', 0.093), ('read', 0.088), ('find', 0.083), ('would', 0.075), ('statistics', 0.071), ('one', 0.068), ('work', 0.058), ('even', 0.052), ('writes', 0.051), ('think', 0.037)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 1.0000001 700 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-06-Suspicious pattern of too-strong replications of medical research

Introduction: Howard Wainer writes in the Statistics Forum: The Chinese scientific literature is rarely read or cited outside of China. But the authors of this work are usually knowledgeable of the non-Chinese literature — at least the A-list journals. And so they too try to replicate the alpha finding. But do they? One would think that they would find the same diminished effect size, but they don’t! Instead they replicate the original result, even larger. Here’s one of the graphs: How did this happen? Full story here .

2 0.24224643 723 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-21-Literary blurb translation guide

Introduction: “Just like literature, only smaller.”

3 0.20227514 717 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-17-Statistics plagiarism scandal

Introduction: See more at the Statistics Forum (of course).

4 0.16789633 2137 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-17-Replication backlash

Introduction: Raghuveer Parthasarathy pointed me to an article in Nature by Mina Bissell, who writes , “The push to replicate findings could shelve promising research and unfairly damage the reputations of careful, meticulous scientists.” I can see where she’s coming from: if you work hard day after day in the lab, it’s gotta be a bit frustrating to find all your work questioned, for the frauds of the Dr. Anil Pottis and Diederik Stapels to be treated as a reason for everyone else’s work to be considered guilty until proven innocent. That said, I pretty much disagree with Bissell’s article, and really the best thing I can say about it is that I think it’s a good sign that the push for replication is so strong that now there’s a backlash against it. Traditionally, leading scientists have been able to simply ignore the push for replication. If they are feeling that the replication movement is strong enough that they need to fight it, that to me is good news. I’ll explain a bit in the conte

5 0.15757786 703 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-10-Bringing Causal Models Into the Mainstream

Introduction: John Johnson writes at the Statistics Forum.

6 0.15205914 517 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-14-Bayes in China update

7 0.14921626 408 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-11-Incumbency advantage in 2010

8 0.13982928 648 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-04-The Case for More False Positives in Anti-doping Testing

9 0.13858128 1032 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-28-Does Avastin work on breast cancer? Should Medicare be paying for it?

10 0.13787237 2218 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-20-Do differences between biology and statistics explain some of our diverging attitudes regarding criticism and replication of scientific claims?

11 0.11490281 2273 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-29-References (with code) for Bayesian hierarchical (multilevel) modeling and structural equation modeling

12 0.11015852 2227 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-27-“What Can we Learn from the Many Labs Replication Project?”

13 0.10876296 302 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-28-This is a link to a news article about a scientific paper

14 0.10517704 658 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-11-Statistics in high schools: Towards more accessible conceptions of statistical inference

15 0.10384301 1265 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-15-Progress in U.S. education; also, a discussion of what it takes to hit the op-ed pages

16 0.098865643 2083 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-31-Value-added modeling in education: Gaming the system by sending kids on a field trip at test time

17 0.096314497 1118 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-14-A model rejection letter

18 0.094891146 1678 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-17-Wanted: 365 stories of statistics

19 0.092144474 686 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-29-What are the open problems in Bayesian statistics??

20 0.088855848 1607 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-05-The p-value is not . . .


similar blogs computed by lsi model

lsi for this blog:

topicId topicWeight

[(0, 0.115), (1, -0.024), (2, -0.034), (3, -0.055), (4, 0.021), (5, -0.053), (6, -0.025), (7, 0.016), (8, -0.004), (9, 0.002), (10, 0.019), (11, -0.003), (12, 0.03), (13, 0.017), (14, 0.02), (15, -0.033), (16, -0.08), (17, 0.095), (18, 0.019), (19, -0.038), (20, 0.006), (21, 0.04), (22, -0.018), (23, -0.061), (24, -0.062), (25, 0.087), (26, -0.022), (27, 0.005), (28, -0.05), (29, 0.011), (30, 0.03), (31, 0.043), (32, -0.008), (33, -0.004), (34, -0.012), (35, 0.011), (36, -0.026), (37, 0.029), (38, 0.063), (39, 0.034), (40, 0.037), (41, -0.076), (42, -0.002), (43, 0.033), (44, 0.011), (45, -0.097), (46, -0.036), (47, -0.023), (48, 0.039), (49, 0.014)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 0.95010418 700 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-06-Suspicious pattern of too-strong replications of medical research

Introduction: Howard Wainer writes in the Statistics Forum: The Chinese scientific literature is rarely read or cited outside of China. But the authors of this work are usually knowledgeable of the non-Chinese literature — at least the A-list journals. And so they too try to replicate the alpha finding. But do they? One would think that they would find the same diminished effect size, but they don’t! Instead they replicate the original result, even larger. Here’s one of the graphs: How did this happen? Full story here .

2 0.77261734 686 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-29-What are the open problems in Bayesian statistics??

Introduction: Follow the discussion (originated by Mike Jordan) at the Statistics Forum.

3 0.75630033 703 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-10-Bringing Causal Models Into the Mainstream

Introduction: John Johnson writes at the Statistics Forum.

4 0.75146955 1032 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-28-Does Avastin work on breast cancer? Should Medicare be paying for it?

Introduction: Discussion by a panel of experts at the Statistics Forum .

5 0.73999918 717 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-17-Statistics plagiarism scandal

Introduction: See more at the Statistics Forum (of course).

6 0.71976203 658 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-11-Statistics in high schools: Towards more accessible conceptions of statistical inference

7 0.63213402 1045 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-07-Martyn Plummer’s Secret JAGS Blog

8 0.62042058 2362 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-06-Statistically savvy journalism

9 0.61638695 933 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-30-More bad news: The (mis)reporting of statistical results in psychology journals

10 0.61577547 648 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-04-The Case for More False Positives in Anti-doping Testing

11 0.61392719 1678 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-17-Wanted: 365 stories of statistics

12 0.56932491 1798 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-11-Continuing conflict over conflict statistics

13 0.56573713 1816 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-21-Exponential increase in the number of stat majors

14 0.56050289 1951 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-22-Top 5 stat papers since 2000?

15 0.55949742 1590 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-26-I need a title for my book on ethics and statistics!!

16 0.55672324 2043 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-29-The difficulties of measuring just about anything

17 0.55269331 723 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-21-Literary blurb translation guide

18 0.53895277 1285 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-27-“How to Lie with Statistics” guy worked for the tobacco industry to mock studies of the risks of smoking statistics

19 0.52872068 953 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-11-Steve Jobs’s cancer and science-based medicine

20 0.52606618 1854 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-13-A Structural Comparison of Conspicuous Consumption in China and the United States


similar blogs computed by lda model

lda for this blog:

topicId topicWeight

[(16, 0.535), (24, 0.023), (38, 0.036), (86, 0.04), (99, 0.211)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

1 0.99345028 1014 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-16-Visualizations of NYPD stop-and-frisk data

Introduction: Cathy O’Neil organized this visualization project with NYPD stop-and-frisk data. It’s part of the Data Without Borders project. Unfortunately, because of legal restrictions I couldn’t send them the data Jeff, Alex, and I used in our project several years ago.

2 0.98723167 572 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-14-Desecration of valuable real estate

Introduction: Malecki asks: Is this the worst infographic ever to appear in NYT? USA Today is not something to aspire to. To connect to some of our recent themes , I agree this is a pretty horrible data display. But it’s not bad as a series of images. Considering the competition to be a cartoon or series of photos, these images aren’t so bad. One issue, I think, is that designers get credit for creativity and originality (unusual color combinations! Histogram bars shaped like mosques!) , which is often the opposite of what we want in a clear graph. It’s Martin Amis vs. George Orwell all over again.

3 0.9845767 1115 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-12-Where are the larger-than-life athletes?

Introduction: Jonathan Cantor points to this poll estimating rifle-armed QB Tim Tebow as America’s favorite pro athlete: In an ESPN survey of 1,502 Americans age 12 or older, three percent identified Tebow as their favorite professional athlete. Tebow finished in front of Kobe Bryant (2 percent), Aaron Rodgers (1.9 percent), Peyton Manning (1.8 percent), and Tom Brady (1.5 percent). Amusing. What this survey says to me is that there are no super-popular athletes who are active in America today. Which actually sounds about right. No Tiger Woods, no Magic Johnson, Muhammed Ali, John Elway, Pete Rose, Billie Jean King, etc etc. Tebow is an amusing choice, people might as well pick him now while he’s still on top. As a sports celeb, he’s like Bill Lee or the Refrigerator: colorful and a solid pro athlete, but no superstar. When you think about all the colorful superstar athletes of times gone by, it’s perhaps surprising that there’s nobody out there right now to play the role. I supp

4 0.98380214 528 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-21-Elevator shame is a two-way street

Introduction: Tyler Cowen links a blog by Samuel Arbesman mocking people who are so lazy that they take the elevator from 1 to 2. This reminds me of my own annoyance about a guy who worked in my building and did not take the elevator. (For the full story, go here and search on “elevator.”)

5 0.9735117 1659 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-07-Some silly things you (didn’t) miss by not reading the sister blog

Introduction: 1. I have the least stressful job in America (duh) 2. B-school prof in a parody of short-term thinking 3. The academic clock 4. I guessed wrong 5. 2012 Conceptual Development Lab Newsletter

6 0.96784174 1026 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-25-Bayes wikipedia update

7 0.96599531 1304 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-06-Picking on Stephen Wolfram

8 0.95492947 1180 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-22-I’m officially no longer a “rogue”

9 0.94874913 1279 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-24-ESPN is looking to hire a research analyst

10 0.94727576 1366 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-05-How do segregation measures change when you change the level of aggregation?

11 0.94065708 398 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-06-Quote of the day

12 0.93212181 1487 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-08-Animated drought maps

13 0.92574143 1745 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-02-Classification error

14 0.92441911 1330 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-19-Cross-validation to check missing-data imputation

15 0.91950619 445 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-03-Getting a job in pro sports… as a statistician

16 0.90576845 1025 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-24-Always check your evidence

17 0.90559852 1598 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-30-A graphics talk with no visuals!

same-blog 18 0.89111733 700 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-06-Suspicious pattern of too-strong replications of medical research

19 0.87390363 1168 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-14-The tabloids strike again

20 0.87260151 1156 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-06-Bayesian model-building by pure thought: Some principles and examples