andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-837 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Hear me interviewed on the topic here . P.S. The interview was fine but I don’t agree with everything on the linked website. For example, this bit: Global warming is not the first case of a widespread fear based on incomplete knowledge turned out to be false or at least greatly exaggerated. Global warming has many of the characteristics of a popular delusion, an irrational fear or cause that is embraced by millions of people because, well, it is believed by millions of people! All right, then.
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 The interview was fine but I don’t agree with everything on the linked website. [sent-4, score-0.567]
2 For example, this bit: Global warming is not the first case of a widespread fear based on incomplete knowledge turned out to be false or at least greatly exaggerated. [sent-5, score-1.92]
3 Global warming has many of the characteristics of a popular delusion, an irrational fear or cause that is embraced by millions of people because, well, it is believed by millions of people! [sent-6, score-2.434]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('warming', 0.357), ('fear', 0.342), ('millions', 0.308), ('global', 0.294), ('delusion', 0.272), ('embraced', 0.224), ('incomplete', 0.214), ('widespread', 0.2), ('irrational', 0.188), ('interviewed', 0.184), ('greatly', 0.174), ('characteristics', 0.168), ('believed', 0.161), ('interview', 0.151), ('turned', 0.142), ('linked', 0.141), ('cause', 0.14), ('false', 0.125), ('hear', 0.123), ('popular', 0.114), ('knowledge', 0.114), ('everything', 0.102), ('fine', 0.093), ('topic', 0.091), ('agree', 0.08), ('people', 0.074), ('least', 0.074), ('based', 0.067), ('bit', 0.066), ('right', 0.062), ('case', 0.058), ('well', 0.057), ('first', 0.053), ('many', 0.05), ('example', 0.045)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 837 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-04-Is it rational to vote?
Introduction: Hear me interviewed on the topic here . P.S. The interview was fine but I don’t agree with everything on the linked website. For example, this bit: Global warming is not the first case of a widespread fear based on incomplete knowledge turned out to be false or at least greatly exaggerated. Global warming has many of the characteristics of a popular delusion, an irrational fear or cause that is embraced by millions of people because, well, it is believed by millions of people! All right, then.
2 0.16155735 983 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-31-Skepticism about skepticism of global warming skepticism skepticism
Introduction: A group of University of California professors headed by physicist Richard Muller recently released a report confirming global warming. Then geophysicist Judith Curry, a coauthor on the papers produced by the Muller group, turned around and said that their data actually show that global warming has stopped. (Also see clarification here .) Curry is described in the news article as the second author on the papers, but the authors are listed alphabetically so it’s probably more accurate to describe her as one of the ten authors. Muller’s one, Curry’s another, . . . now I want to know what 7 of the other 8 authors think! (One of the authors is Richard Muller’s daughter Elizabeth, so maybe we shouldn’t count her as an independent view.) Some enterprising reporter should really interview the other 7 authors of that report . Just a quick question like, “Is there scientific basis for saying that warming hasn’t stopped?” To add some fuel to the fire, let me repost what my ph
Introduction: I came across a document [updated link here ], “Applying structured analogies to the global warming alarm movement,” by Kesten Green and Scott Armstrong. The general approach is appealing to me, but the execution seemed disturbingly flawed. Here’s how they introduce the project: The structured analogies procedure we [Green and Armstrong] used for this study was as follows: 1. Identify possible analogies by searching the literature and by asking experts with different viewpoints to nominate analogies to the target situation: alarm over dangerous manmade global warming. 2. Screen the possible analogies to ensure they meet the stated criteria and that the outcomes are known. 3. Code the relevant characteristics of the analogous situations. 4. Forecast target situation outcomes by using a predetermined mechanical rule to select the outcomes of the analogies. Here is how we posed the question to the experts: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and other organizat
4 0.14205971 180 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-03-Climate Change News
Introduction: I. State of the Climate report The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration recently released their “State of the Climate Report” for 2009 . The report has chapters discussing global climate (temperatures, water vapor, cloudiness, alpine glaciers,…); oceans (ocean heat content, sea level, sea surface temperatures, etc.); the arctic (sea ice extent, permafrost, vegetation, and so on); Antarctica (weather observations, sea ice extent,…), and regional climates. NOAA also provides a nice page that lets you display any of 11 relevant time-series datasets (land-surface air temperature, sea level, ocean heat content, September arctic sea-ice extent, sea-surface temperature, northern hemisphere snow cover, specific humidity, glacier mass balance, marine air temperature, tropospheric temperature, and stratospheric temperature). Each of the plots overlays data from several databases (not necessarily indepenedent of each other), and you can select which ones to include or leave
5 0.1339419 219 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-20-Some things are just really hard to believe: more on choosing your facts.
Introduction: Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to think that Barack Obama is a Muslim and was born in Kenya. But why? People choose to be Republicans or Democrats because they prefer the policy or ideology of one party or another, and it’s not obvious that there should be any connection whatsoever between those factors and their judgment of a factual matter such as Obama’s religion or country of birth. In fact, people on opposite sides of many issues, such as gay marriage, immigration policy, global warming, and continued U.S. presence in Iraq, tend to disagree, often by a huge amount, on factual matters such as whether the children of gay couples have more psychological problems than the children of straight couples, what are the economic impacts of illegal immigration, what is the effect of doubling carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and so on. Of course, it makes sense that people with different judgment of the facts would have different views on policies: if you think ca
7 0.08826793 892 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-06-Info on patent trolls
8 0.080298953 758 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-11-Hey, good news! Your p-value just passed the 0.05 threshold!
9 0.078149192 1424 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-22-Extreme events as evidence for differences in distributions
10 0.077171952 505 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-05-Wacky interview questions: An exploration into the nature of evidence on the internet
11 0.076073512 1201 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-07-Inference = data + model
12 0.070782572 981 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-30-rms2
13 0.066822261 2321 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-05-On deck this week
14 0.06633503 477 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-20-Costless false beliefs
15 0.066203624 600 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-04-“Social Psychologists Detect Liberal Bias Within”
16 0.060439087 1403 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-02-Moving beyond hopeless graphics
17 0.06019444 1704 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-03-Heuristics for identifying ecological fallacies?
18 0.059927836 1569 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-08-30-30-40 Nation
19 0.058706909 1111 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-10-The blog of the Cultural Cognition Project
20 0.058199748 1158 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-07-The more likely it is to be X, the more likely it is to be Not X?
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.072), (1, -0.031), (2, 0.015), (3, -0.003), (4, -0.016), (5, -0.008), (6, 0.02), (7, -0.001), (8, 0.017), (9, 0.003), (10, -0.041), (11, 0.003), (12, 0.013), (13, -0.005), (14, -0.02), (15, 0.006), (16, 0.017), (17, 0.01), (18, 0.033), (19, -0.003), (20, -0.024), (21, -0.004), (22, -0.027), (23, -0.013), (24, -0.0), (25, 0.002), (26, 0.011), (27, -0.032), (28, 0.032), (29, 0.011), (30, -0.001), (31, 0.037), (32, -0.01), (33, -0.016), (34, -0.049), (35, -0.029), (36, 0.029), (37, 0.012), (38, -0.003), (39, -0.01), (40, -0.011), (41, 0.01), (42, 0.003), (43, -0.001), (44, -0.009), (45, 0.018), (46, -0.023), (47, 0.012), (48, -0.031), (49, -0.015)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.93204689 837 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-04-Is it rational to vote?
Introduction: Hear me interviewed on the topic here . P.S. The interview was fine but I don’t agree with everything on the linked website. For example, this bit: Global warming is not the first case of a widespread fear based on incomplete knowledge turned out to be false or at least greatly exaggerated. Global warming has many of the characteristics of a popular delusion, an irrational fear or cause that is embraced by millions of people because, well, it is believed by millions of people! All right, then.
2 0.73243105 983 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-31-Skepticism about skepticism of global warming skepticism skepticism
Introduction: A group of University of California professors headed by physicist Richard Muller recently released a report confirming global warming. Then geophysicist Judith Curry, a coauthor on the papers produced by the Muller group, turned around and said that their data actually show that global warming has stopped. (Also see clarification here .) Curry is described in the news article as the second author on the papers, but the authors are listed alphabetically so it’s probably more accurate to describe her as one of the ten authors. Muller’s one, Curry’s another, . . . now I want to know what 7 of the other 8 authors think! (One of the authors is Richard Muller’s daughter Elizabeth, so maybe we shouldn’t count her as an independent view.) Some enterprising reporter should really interview the other 7 authors of that report . Just a quick question like, “Is there scientific basis for saying that warming hasn’t stopped?” To add some fuel to the fire, let me repost what my ph
Introduction: I came across a document [updated link here ], “Applying structured analogies to the global warming alarm movement,” by Kesten Green and Scott Armstrong. The general approach is appealing to me, but the execution seemed disturbingly flawed. Here’s how they introduce the project: The structured analogies procedure we [Green and Armstrong] used for this study was as follows: 1. Identify possible analogies by searching the literature and by asking experts with different viewpoints to nominate analogies to the target situation: alarm over dangerous manmade global warming. 2. Screen the possible analogies to ensure they meet the stated criteria and that the outcomes are known. 3. Code the relevant characteristics of the analogous situations. 4. Forecast target situation outcomes by using a predetermined mechanical rule to select the outcomes of the analogies. Here is how we posed the question to the experts: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and other organizat
Introduction: My friend Seth, whom I know from Berkeley (we taught a course together on left-handedness), has a blog on topics ranging from thoughtful discussions of scientific evidence, to experiences with his unconventional weight-loss scheme, offbeat self-experimentation, and advocacy of fringe scientific theories, leavened with occasional dollops of cynicism and political extremism . I agree with Seth on some things but not others. ( Here’s Seth’s reason for not attempting a clinical trial of his diet.) Recently I was disturbed (but, I’m sorry to say, not surprised) to see Seth post the following: Predictions of climate models versus reality . I [Seth] have only seen careful prediction-vs-reality comparisons made by AGW [anthropogenic global warming] skeptics. Those who believe humans are dangerously warming the planet appear to be silent on this subject. In response, Phil commented : Funny, on the day you [Seth] made your post saying that you haven’t seen comparis
5 0.6762957 477 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-20-Costless false beliefs
Introduction: From the Gallup Poll : Four in 10 Americans, slightly fewer today than in years past, believe God created humans in their present form about 10,000 years ago. They’ve been asking the question since 1982 and it’s been pretty steady at 45%, so in some sense this is good news! (I’m saying this under the completely unsupported belief that it’s better for people to believe truths than falsehoods.) One way to think of this is that, for the overwhelming majority of people, a personal belief in young-earth creationism (or whatever you want to call it) is costless. Or, to put it another way, the discomfort involved in holding a belief that contradicts everything you were taught in school is greater than the discomfort involved in holding a belief that seems to contradict your religious values (keeping in mind that, even among those who report attending church seldom or never, a quarter of these people agree that “God created humans in their present form about 10,000 years ago”).
6 0.66277206 219 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-20-Some things are just really hard to believe: more on choosing your facts.
7 0.63868475 180 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-03-Climate Change News
9 0.61646479 2341 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-20-plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose
11 0.60789436 108 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-24-Sometimes the raw numbers are better than a percentage
12 0.60448474 563 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-07-Evaluating predictions of political events
13 0.60254878 53 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-26-Tumors, on the left, or on the right?
14 0.60180402 1319 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-14-I hate to get all Gerd Gigerenzer on you here, but . . .
15 0.59855294 1058 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-14-Higgs bozos: Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are spinning in their graves
16 0.59718204 1501 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-18-More studies on the economic effects of climate change
17 0.59437937 707 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-12-Human nature can’t be changed (except when it can)
18 0.59369028 238 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-27-No radon lobby
19 0.5905177 1845 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-07-Is Felix Salmon wrong on free TV?
20 0.58997989 622 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-21-A possible resolution of the albedo mystery!
topicId topicWeight
[(2, 0.079), (9, 0.035), (16, 0.045), (24, 0.104), (35, 0.247), (95, 0.026), (99, 0.311)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.97664964 473 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-17-Why a bonobo won’t play poker with you
Introduction: Sciencedaily has posted an article titled Apes Unwilling to Gamble When Odds Are Uncertain : The apes readily distinguished between the different probabilities of winning: they gambled a lot when there was a 100 percent chance, less when there was a 50 percent chance, and only rarely when there was no chance In some trials, however, the experimenter didn’t remove a lid from the bowl, so the apes couldn’t assess the likelihood of winning a banana The odds from the covered bowl were identical to those from the risky option: a 50 percent chance of getting the much sought-after banana. But apes of both species were less likely to choose this ambiguous option. Like humans, they showed “ambiguity aversion” — preferring to gamble more when they knew the odds than when they didn’t. Given some of the other differences between chimps and bonobos, Hare and Rosati had expected to find the bonobos to be more averse to ambiguity, but that didn’t turn out to be the case. Thanks to Sta
same-blog 2 0.96663165 837 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-04-Is it rational to vote?
Introduction: Hear me interviewed on the topic here . P.S. The interview was fine but I don’t agree with everything on the linked website. For example, this bit: Global warming is not the first case of a widespread fear based on incomplete knowledge turned out to be false or at least greatly exaggerated. Global warming has many of the characteristics of a popular delusion, an irrational fear or cause that is embraced by millions of people because, well, it is believed by millions of people! All right, then.
3 0.93302786 881 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-30-Rickey Henderson and Peter Angelos, together again
Introduction: Today I was reminded of a riddle from junior high: Q: What do you get when you cross an elephant with peanut butter? A: Peanut butter that never forgets, or an elephant that sticks to the roof of your mouth. The occasion was a link from Tyler Cowen to a new book by Garry Kasparov and . . . Peter Thiel. Kasparov we all know about. I still remember how he pulled out a victory in the last game of his tournament with Karpov. Just amazing: he had to win the game, a draw would not be enough. Both players knew that Kasparov had to win. And he did it. A feat as impressive as Kirk Gibson’s off-the-bench game-winning home run in the 1987 Series. Peter Theil is a more obscure figure. He’s been featured a couple of times on this blog and comes across as your typical overconfident rich dude. It’s an odd combination, sort of like what you might get if Rickey Henderson and Peter Angelos were to write a book about how to reform baseball. Cowen writes, “How can I not pre-orde
4 0.90539062 942 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-04-45% hitting, 25% fielding, 25% pitching, and 100% not telling us how they did it
Introduction: A University of Delaware press release reports : This month, the Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports will feature the article “An Estimate of How Hitting, Pitching, Fielding, and Base-stealing Impact Team Winning Percentages in Baseball.” In it, University of Delaware Prof. Charles Pavitt of the Department of Communication defines the perfect “formula” for Major League Baseball (MLB) teams to use to build the ultimate winning team. Pavitt found hitting accounts for more than 45 percent of teams’ winning records, fielding for 25 percent and pitching for 25 percent. And that the impact of stolen bases is greatly overestimated. He crunched hitting, pitching, fielding and base-stealing records for every MLB team over a 48-year period from 1951-1998 with a method no other researcher has used in this area. In statistical parlance, he used a conceptual decomposition of offense and defense into its component parts and then analyzed recombinations of the parts in intuitively mea
Introduction: About 12 years ago Greg Wawro, Sy Spilerman, and I started a M.A. program here in Quantitative Methods in Social Sciences, jointly between the departments of history, economics, political science, sociology, psychology, and statistics. We created a bunch of new features for the program, including an interdisciplinary course based on this book . And here’s their new logo: Don’t blame me for the pie-chart motif! Seriously, though, the program is great. I’m proud to have gotten it started, and I’m impressed by the progress that Chris Weiss and others have made in expanding the program during the past decade.
6 0.89172184 895 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-08-How to solve the Post Office’s problems?
7 0.89161164 1443 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-04-Bayesian Learning via Stochastic Gradient Langevin Dynamics
8 0.86746109 2049 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-03-On house arrest for p-hacking
9 0.86510956 1516 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-30-Computational problems with glm etc.
10 0.86170936 296 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-26-A simple semigraphic display
11 0.86028206 1926 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-05-More plain old everyday Bayesianism
12 0.84673959 1264 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-14-Learning from failure
13 0.82949841 392 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-03-Taleb + 3.5 years
14 0.82418144 388 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-01-The placebo effect in pharma
15 0.82209259 331 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-10-Bayes jumps the shark
16 0.82179815 2274 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-30-Adjudicating between alternative interpretations of a statistical interaction?
17 0.82020307 2253 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-17-On deck this week: Revisitings
18 0.81635594 2185 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-25-Xihong Lin on sparsity and density
19 0.80854732 1482 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-04-Model checking and model understanding in machine learning
20 0.79942906 352 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-19-Analysis of survey data: Design based models vs. hierarchical modeling?