andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-876 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Underground norms from Jay Livingston. P.S. The Coke story is here (and is followed up in the comments).
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 The Coke story is here (and is followed up in the comments). [sent-4, score-0.425]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('underground', 0.534), ('coke', 0.515), ('norms', 0.429), ('jay', 0.368), ('followed', 0.262), ('comments', 0.188), ('story', 0.163)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999988 876 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-28-Vaguely related to the coke-dumping story
Introduction: Underground norms from Jay Livingston. P.S. The Coke story is here (and is followed up in the comments).
2 0.095094159 408 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-11-Incumbency advantage in 2010
Introduction: See here for the full story.
Introduction: What follows is a long response to a comment on someone else’s blog . The quote is, “Thinking like an economist simply means that you scientifically approach human social behavior. . . .” I’ll give the context in a bit, but first let me say that I thought this topic might be worth one more discussion because I suspect that the sort of economics exceptionalism that I will discuss is widely disseminated in college econ courses as well as in books such as the Freakonomics series. It’s great to have pride in human achievements but at some point too much group self-regard can be distorting. My best analogy to economics exceptionalism is Freudianism in the 1950s: Back then, Freudian psychiatrists were on the top of the world. Not only were they well paid, well respected, and secure in their theoretical foundations, they were also at the center of many important conversations. Even those people who disagreed with them felt the need to explain why the Freudians were wrong. Freudian
4 0.092159808 191 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-08-Angry about the soda tax
Introduction: My Columbia colleague Sheena Iyengar (most famous among ARM readers for her speed-dating experiment) writes an interesting column on potential reactions to a tax on sugary drinks. The idea is that people might be so annoyed at being told what to do that they might buy more of the stuff, at least in the short term. On the other hand, given the famous subsidies involved in the production of high-fructose corn syrup, soda pop is probably a bit cheaper than it should be, so maybe it all balances out? I agree with Sheena that there’s something about loss of control that is particularly frustrating. One thing that bugs me when I buy a Coke is that I’m paying for the fees of Michael Jordan or whoever it is they have nowadays endorsing their product. I wish there were some way I could just pay for everything else but withhold the money that’s going into those silly celebrity endorsements.
5 0.088764727 840 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-05-An example of Bayesian model averaging
Introduction: Jay Ulfelder writes: I see that you blogged about limitations of Bayesian model averaging. As it happens, I was also blogging about BMA, but with an example where it seems to be working reasonably well, at least for the narrow purpose of forecasting. The topic is the analysis I did for CFR earlier this year on nonviolent uprisings. I don’t have time to look into this one but I wanted to pass it on.
6 0.078572929 1170 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-16-A previous discussion with Charles Murray about liberals, conservatives, and social class
7 0.066739544 1791 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-07-Scatterplot charades!
8 0.063235544 1003 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-11-$
9 0.060458753 1973 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-08-For chrissake, just make up an analysis already! We have a lab here to run, y’know?
10 0.0603889 1997 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-24-Measurement error in monkey studies
11 0.059856124 1896 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-13-Against the myth of the heroic visualization
12 0.057943463 2075 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-23-PubMed Commons: A system for commenting on articles in PubMed
13 0.052646682 790 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-08-Blog in motion
14 0.052117076 363 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-22-Graphing Likert scale responses
15 0.052094884 2236 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-07-Selection bias in the reporting of shaky research
16 0.050812647 2134 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-14-Oswald evidence
17 0.050242562 619 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-19-If a comment is flagged as spam, it will disappear forever
18 0.04984415 1057 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-14-Hey—I didn’t know that!
19 0.049626231 1994 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-22-“The comment section is open, but I’m not going to read them”
20 0.04934651 1398 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-28-Every time you take a sample, you’ll have to pay this guy a quarter
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.021), (1, -0.019), (2, -0.012), (3, 0.004), (4, 0.001), (5, -0.011), (6, 0.019), (7, -0.006), (8, 0.02), (9, -0.003), (10, 0.0), (11, 0.014), (12, 0.013), (13, 0.015), (14, -0.003), (15, 0.0), (16, 0.007), (17, -0.005), (18, -0.006), (19, 0.017), (20, 0.011), (21, -0.016), (22, -0.008), (23, -0.034), (24, -0.001), (25, 0.013), (26, 0.017), (27, 0.019), (28, -0.011), (29, 0.009), (30, 0.003), (31, 0.017), (32, 0.001), (33, -0.001), (34, 0.017), (35, 0.029), (36, -0.007), (37, 0.016), (38, 0.027), (39, 0.003), (40, -0.012), (41, 0.018), (42, -0.019), (43, -0.006), (44, 0.015), (45, -0.021), (46, 0.012), (47, -0.005), (48, -0.017), (49, 0.002)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.97897059 876 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-28-Vaguely related to the coke-dumping story
Introduction: Underground norms from Jay Livingston. P.S. The Coke story is here (and is followed up in the comments).
2 0.72115868 619 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-19-If a comment is flagged as spam, it will disappear forever
Introduction: A commenter wrote (by email): I’ve noticed that you’ve quit approving my comments on your blog. I hope I didn’t anger you in some way or write something you felt was inappropriate. My reply: I have not been unapproving any comments. If you have comments that have not appeared, they have probably been going into the spam filter. I get literally thousands of spam comments a day and so anything that hits the spam filter is gone forever. I think there is a way to register as a commenter; that could help.
3 0.70466274 839 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-04-To commenters who are trying to sell something
Introduction: We screen our comments. If you link to an url of the form, http://we’re-selling-you-crap.org, then you go straight into the spam folder. If you want to contribute to the discussion here, fine. Comment without the spam links. If you want to advertise, go elsewhere. It’s customary to pay for ads. We have no plans to advertise your services for free.
4 0.68240207 523 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-18-Spam is out of control
Introduction: I just took a look at the spam folder . . . 600 messages in the past hour ! Seems pretty ridiculous to me.
5 0.67707497 425 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-21-If your comment didn’t get through . . .
Introduction: It probably got caught in the spam filter. We get tons and tons of spam (including the annoying spam that I have to remove by hand). If your comment was accompanied by an ad or a spam link, then maybe I just deleted it.
6 0.66199118 1488 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-08-Annals of spam
7 0.65561593 132 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-07-Note to “Cigarettes”
8 0.63545382 1791 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-07-Scatterplot charades!
9 0.62556893 9 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-28-But it all goes to pay for gas, car insurance, and tolls on the turnpike
10 0.61714643 1168 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-14-The tabloids strike again
11 0.61712652 817 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-23-New blog home
12 0.60228294 771 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-16-30 days of statistics
13 0.56616259 1202 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-08-Between and within-Krugman correlation
14 0.55926961 1709 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-06-The fractal nature of scientific revolutions
15 0.53962392 790 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-08-Blog in motion
16 0.52084816 2075 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-23-PubMed Commons: A system for commenting on articles in PubMed
17 0.51076597 27 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-11-Update on the spam email study
18 0.50889933 220 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-20-Why I blog?
19 0.50023443 1994 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-22-“The comment section is open, but I’m not going to read them”
20 0.48562071 199 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-11-Note to semi-spammers
topicId topicWeight
[(16, 0.051), (95, 0.537), (99, 0.132)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.99259424 520 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-17-R Advertised
Introduction: The R language is definitely going mainstream:
same-blog 2 0.94767761 876 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-28-Vaguely related to the coke-dumping story
Introduction: Underground norms from Jay Livingston. P.S. The Coke story is here (and is followed up in the comments).
3 0.90527916 2101 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-15-BDA class 4 G+ hangout on air is on air
Introduction: Here. And here ‘s the backstory. P.S. The damn mike was muted most of the time. Something always goes wrong!
4 0.80544645 832 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-31-Even a good data display can sometimes be improved
Introduction: When I first saw this graphic, I thought “boy, that’s great, sometimes the graphic practically makes itself.” Normally it’s hard to use lots of different colors to differentiate items of interest, because there’s usually not an intuitive mapping between color and item (e.g. for countries, or states, or whatever). But the colors of crayons, what could be more perfect? So this graphic seemed awesome. But, as they discovered after some experimentation at datapointed.net there is an even BETTER possibility here. Click the link to see. Crayola Crayon colors by year
5 0.77567226 1820 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-23-Foundation for Open Access Statistics
Introduction: Now here’s a foundation I (Bob) can get behind: Foundation for Open Access Statistics (FOAS) Their mission is to “promote free software, open access publishing, and reproducible research in statistics.” To me, that’s like supporting motherhood and apple pie ! FOAS spun out of and is partially designed to support the Journal of Statistical Software (aka JSS , aka JStatSoft ). I adore JSS because it (a) is open access, (b) publishes systems papers on statistical software, (c) has fast reviewing turnaround times, and (d) is free for authors and readers. One of the next items on my to-do list is to write up the Stan modeling language and submit it to JSS . As a not-for-profit with no visible source of income, they are quite sensibly asking for donations (don’t complain — it beats $3K author fees or not being able to read papers).
6 0.69937205 1862 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-18-uuuuuuuuuuuuugly
9 0.67878222 1667 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-10-When you SHARE poorly researched infographics…
10 0.63747543 12 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-30-More on problems with surveys estimating deaths in war zones
11 0.59437406 1308 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-08-chartsnthings !
12 0.58653903 1164 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-13-Help with this problem, win valuable prizes
13 0.58244765 519 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-16-Update on the generalized method of moments
14 0.57902169 1086 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-27-The most dangerous jobs in America
15 0.56924534 627 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-24-How few respondents are reasonable to use when calculating the average by county?
16 0.50674862 266 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-09-The future of R
17 0.50497615 944 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-05-How accurate is your gaydar?
18 0.49362057 1595 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-28-Should Harvard start admitting kids at random?
19 0.49009609 1643 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-29-Sexism in science (as elsewhere)
20 0.47915393 1646 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-01-Back when fifty years was a long time ago