andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1118 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Howard Wainer sends in this rejection letter from Sir David Brewster of The Edinburgh Journal of Science to Charles Babbage: It is no inconsiderable degree of reluctance that I decline the offer of any Paper from you. I think, however, you will upon reconsideration of the subject be of the opinion that I have no other alternative. The subjects you propose for a series of Mathematical and Metaphysical Essays are so profound, that there is perhaps not a single subscriber to our Journal who could follow them. Nowadays, he could just submit to Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews . . .
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Howard Wainer sends in this rejection letter from Sir David Brewster of The Edinburgh Journal of Science to Charles Babbage: It is no inconsiderable degree of reluctance that I decline the offer of any Paper from you. [sent-1, score-1.145]
2 I think, however, you will upon reconsideration of the subject be of the opinion that I have no other alternative. [sent-2, score-0.372]
3 The subjects you propose for a series of Mathematical and Metaphysical Essays are so profound, that there is perhaps not a single subscriber to our Journal who could follow them. [sent-3, score-1.092]
4 Nowadays, he could just submit to Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews . [sent-4, score-0.247]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('subscriber', 0.277), ('edinburgh', 0.261), ('sir', 0.234), ('wiley', 0.234), ('essays', 0.223), ('reluctance', 0.218), ('profound', 0.218), ('wainer', 0.204), ('interdisciplinary', 0.201), ('howard', 0.189), ('rejection', 0.189), ('propose', 0.187), ('journal', 0.178), ('charles', 0.174), ('reviews', 0.169), ('submit', 0.167), ('decline', 0.164), ('nowadays', 0.155), ('letter', 0.154), ('subjects', 0.15), ('degree', 0.149), ('sends', 0.144), ('upon', 0.142), ('offer', 0.127), ('mathematical', 0.126), ('subject', 0.118), ('series', 0.117), ('opinion', 0.112), ('follow', 0.109), ('single', 0.102), ('david', 0.101), ('however', 0.093), ('could', 0.08), ('perhaps', 0.07), ('science', 0.067), ('paper', 0.058), ('think', 0.03)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 1118 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-14-A model rejection letter
Introduction: Howard Wainer sends in this rejection letter from Sir David Brewster of The Edinburgh Journal of Science to Charles Babbage: It is no inconsiderable degree of reluctance that I decline the offer of any Paper from you. I think, however, you will upon reconsideration of the subject be of the opinion that I have no other alternative. The subjects you propose for a series of Mathematical and Metaphysical Essays are so profound, that there is perhaps not a single subscriber to our Journal who could follow them. Nowadays, he could just submit to Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews . . .
Introduction: Someone passed on to a message from his university library announcing that the journal “Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics” is no longer free. Librarians have to decide what to do, so I thought I’d offer the following consumer guide: Wiley Computational Statistics journal Wikipedia Frequency 6 issues per year Continuously updated Includes articles from Wikipedia? Yes Yes Cites the Wikipedia sources it uses? No Yes Edited by recipient of ASA Founders Award? Yes No Articles are subject to rigorous review? No Yes Errors, when discovered, get fixed? No Yes Number of vertices in n-dimensional hypercube? 2n 2 n Easy access to Brady Bunch trivia? No Yes Cost (North America) $1400-$2800 $0 Cost (UK) £986-£1972 £0 Cost (Europe) €1213-€2426 €0 The choice seems pretty clear to me! It’s funny for the Wiley journal to start charging now
3 0.10832509 1393 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-26-The reverse-journal-submission system
Introduction: I’ve whined before in this space that some of my most important, innovative, and influential papers are really hard to get published. I’ll go through endless hassle with a journal or sometimes several journals until I find some place willing to publish. It’s just irritating. I was thinking about this recently because a colleague and I just finished a paper that I love love love. But I can’t figure out where to submit it. This is a paper for which I would prefer the so-called reverse-journal-submission approach. Instead of sending the paper to journal after journal after journal, waiting years until an acceptance (recall that, unless you’re Bruno Frey, you’re not allowed to submit the same paper to multiple journals simultaneously), you post the paper on a public site, and then journals compete to see who gets to publish it. I think that system would work well with a paper like this which is offbeat but has a nontrivial chance of becoming highly influential. P.S. Just to clar
Introduction: Just in time for Halloween, here’s a horror story for you . . . Howard Wainer writes: In my book “Uneducated Guesses” in the chapter on value-added models, I discuss how the treatment of missing data can have a profound effect on the estimates of teacher scores. I made up how a principal might send the best students on a field trip at the beginning of the year when the ‘pre-test’ was given (and their scores would be imputed from the students who showed up) and that the bottom half of the class would have a matching field trip on the day of the post test. Everyone laughed. But apparently someone decided to take it seriously. http://www.amren.com/news/2012/10/el-paso-schools-confront-scandal-of-students-who-disappeared-at-test-time/ http://www.elpasotimes.com/episd/ci_20848628/former-episd-superintendent-lorenzo-garcia-enter-plea-aggreement You can’t make this stuff up. This sort of thing is not surprising but it’s worth keeping in mind. That a measurement system c
5 0.10222717 2023 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-14-On blogging
Introduction: From 1982: The necessary conceit of the essayist must be that in writing down what is obvious to him he is not wasting his reader’s time. The value of what he does will depend on the quality of his perception, not on the length of his manuscript. Too many dull books about literature would have been tolerably long essays; too many dull long essays would have been reasonably interesting short ones; too many short essays should have been letters to the editor. If the essayist has a literary personality his essay will add up to something all of a piece. If he has not, he may write fancily titled books until doomsday and do no good. Most of the criticism that matters at all has been written in essay form. This fact is no great mystery: what there is to say about literature is very important, but there just isn’t all that much of it. Literature says most things itself, when it is allowed to. Free copy of Stan to the first commenter who identifies the source of the above quote.
6 0.096314497 700 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-06-Suspicious pattern of too-strong replications of medical research
7 0.09139625 1324 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-16-Wikipedia author confronts Ed Wegman
8 0.084542103 2353 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-30-I posted this as a comment on a sociology blog
9 0.080574766 836 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-03-Another plagiarism mystery
11 0.075190909 2239 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-09-Reviewing the peer review process?
12 0.072266325 263 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-08-The China Study: fact or fallacy?
13 0.072260164 112 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-27-Sampling rate of human-scaled time series
14 0.068883166 1137 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-24-Difficulties in publishing non-replications of implausible findings
15 0.068651639 357 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-20-Sas and R
16 0.067736812 2233 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-04-Literal vs. rhetorical
17 0.066761442 879 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-29-New journal on causal inference
18 0.065979198 2211 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-14-The popularity of certain baby names is falling off the clifffffffffffff
19 0.065280549 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
20 0.061136577 2278 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-01-Association for Psychological Science announces a new journal
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.071), (1, -0.027), (2, -0.043), (3, -0.046), (4, -0.023), (5, -0.009), (6, -0.022), (7, -0.039), (8, -0.043), (9, 0.018), (10, 0.065), (11, -0.023), (12, -0.031), (13, 0.007), (14, 0.005), (15, -0.021), (16, 0.017), (17, 0.014), (18, -0.015), (19, -0.026), (20, 0.006), (21, 0.012), (22, 0.031), (23, -0.012), (24, 0.009), (25, 0.013), (26, 0.004), (27, 0.003), (28, 0.009), (29, -0.01), (30, -0.027), (31, -0.013), (32, -0.009), (33, 0.001), (34, -0.009), (35, -0.02), (36, 0.006), (37, -0.009), (38, 0.046), (39, 0.052), (40, -0.016), (41, 0.003), (42, -0.02), (43, 0.003), (44, -0.025), (45, -0.016), (46, -0.019), (47, 0.025), (48, 0.009), (49, 0.016)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.95534056 1118 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-14-A model rejection letter
Introduction: Howard Wainer sends in this rejection letter from Sir David Brewster of The Edinburgh Journal of Science to Charles Babbage: It is no inconsiderable degree of reluctance that I decline the offer of any Paper from you. I think, however, you will upon reconsideration of the subject be of the opinion that I have no other alternative. The subjects you propose for a series of Mathematical and Metaphysical Essays are so profound, that there is perhaps not a single subscriber to our Journal who could follow them. Nowadays, he could just submit to Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews . . .
2 0.75489354 1122 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-16-“Groundbreaking or Definitive? Journals Need to Pick One”
Introduction: Sanjay Srivastava writes : As long as a journal pursues a strategy of publishing “wow” studies, it will inevitably contain more unreplicable findings and unsupportable conclusions than equally rigorous but more “boring” journals. Groundbreaking will always be higher-risk. And definitive will be the territory of journals that publish meta-analyses and reviews. . . . Most conclusions, even those in peer-reviewed papers in rigorous journals, should be regarded as tentative at best; but press releases and other public communication rarely convey that. . . . His message to all of us: Our standard response to a paper in Science, Nature, or Psychological Science should be “wow, that’ll be really interesting if it replicates.” And in our teaching and our engagement with the press and public, we need to make clear why that is the most enthusiastic response we can justify.
3 0.72691441 1321 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-15-A statistical research project: Weeding out the fraudulent citations
Introduction: John Mashey points me to a blog post by Phil Davis on “the emergence of a citation cartel.” Davis tells the story: Cell Transplantation is a medical journal published by the Cognizant Communication Corporation of Putnam Valley, New York. In recent years, its impact factor has been growing rapidly. In 2006, it was 3.482 [I think he means "3.5"---ed.]. In 2010, it had almost doubled to 6.204. When you look at which journals cite Cell Transplantation, two journals stand out noticeably: the Medical Science Monitor, and The Scientific World Journal. According to the JCR, neither of these journals cited Cell Transplantation until 2010. Then, in 2010, a review article was published in the Medical Science Monitor citing 490 articles, 445 of which were to papers published in Cell Transplantation. All 445 citations pointed to papers published in 2008 or 2009 — the citation window from which the journal’s 2010 impact factor was derived. Of the remaining 45 citations, 44 cited the Me
4 0.72538018 834 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-01-I owe it all to the haters
Introduction: Sometimes when I submit an article to a journal it is accepted right away or with minor alterations. But many of my favorite articles were rejected or had to go through an exhausting series of revisions. For example, this influential article had a very hostile referee and we had to seriously push the journal editor to accept it. This one was rejected by one or two journals before finally appearing with discussion. This paper was rejected by the American Political Science Review with no chance of revision and we had to publish it in the British Journal of Political Science, which was a bit odd given that the article was 100% about American politics. And when I submitted this instant classic (actually at the invitation of the editor), the referees found it to be trivial, and the editor did me the favor of publishing it but only by officially labeling it as a discussion of another article that appeared in the same issue. Some of my most influential papers were accepted right
Introduction: Someone passed on to a message from his university library announcing that the journal “Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics” is no longer free. Librarians have to decide what to do, so I thought I’d offer the following consumer guide: Wiley Computational Statistics journal Wikipedia Frequency 6 issues per year Continuously updated Includes articles from Wikipedia? Yes Yes Cites the Wikipedia sources it uses? No Yes Edited by recipient of ASA Founders Award? Yes No Articles are subject to rigorous review? No Yes Errors, when discovered, get fixed? No Yes Number of vertices in n-dimensional hypercube? 2n 2 n Easy access to Brady Bunch trivia? No Yes Cost (North America) $1400-$2800 $0 Cost (UK) £986-£1972 £0 Cost (Europe) €1213-€2426 €0 The choice seems pretty clear to me! It’s funny for the Wiley journal to start charging now
6 0.71322876 1915 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-27-Huh?
7 0.71213275 1911 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-23-AI Stats conference on Stan etc.
8 0.70831496 1928 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-06-How to think about papers published in low-grade journals?
9 0.6840381 838 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-04-Retraction Watch
10 0.67748666 172 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-30-Why don’t we have peer reviewing for oral presentations?
11 0.67609721 1137 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-24-Difficulties in publishing non-replications of implausible findings
12 0.67364508 2353 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-30-I posted this as a comment on a sociology blog
13 0.67147332 1393 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-26-The reverse-journal-submission system
15 0.66199803 1429 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-26-Our broken scholarly publishing system
16 0.65329456 2239 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-09-Reviewing the peer review process?
17 0.65129262 762 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-13-How should journals handle replication studies?
18 0.64723259 1774 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-22-Likelihood Ratio ≠ 1 Journal
19 0.64253992 2095 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-09-Typo in Ghitza and Gelman MRP paper
20 0.64229155 2278 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-01-Association for Psychological Science announces a new journal
topicId topicWeight
[(10, 0.023), (16, 0.224), (24, 0.133), (27, 0.053), (56, 0.032), (95, 0.026), (96, 0.242), (99, 0.13)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.92399126 1118 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-14-A model rejection letter
Introduction: Howard Wainer sends in this rejection letter from Sir David Brewster of The Edinburgh Journal of Science to Charles Babbage: It is no inconsiderable degree of reluctance that I decline the offer of any Paper from you. I think, however, you will upon reconsideration of the subject be of the opinion that I have no other alternative. The subjects you propose for a series of Mathematical and Metaphysical Essays are so profound, that there is perhaps not a single subscriber to our Journal who could follow them. Nowadays, he could just submit to Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews . . .
2 0.81508213 1306 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-07-Lists of Note and Letters of Note
Introduction: These (from Shaun Usher) are surprisingly good, especially since he appears to come up with new lists and letters pretty regularly. I suppose a lot of them get sent in from readers, but still. Here’s my favorite recent item, a letter sent to the Seattle Bureau of Prohibition in 1931: Dear Sir: My husband is in the habit of buying a quart of wiskey every other day from a Chinese bootlegger named Chin Waugh living at 317-16th near Alder street. We need this money for household expenses. Will you please have his place raided? He keeps a supply planted in the garden and a smaller quantity under the back steps for quick delivery. If you make the raid at 9:30 any morning you will be sure to get the goods and Chin also as he leaves the house at 10 o’clock and may clean up before he goes. Thanking you in advance, I remain yours truly, Mrs. Hillyer
3 0.78613693 169 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-29-Say again?
Introduction: “Ich glaube, dass die Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung das richtige Werkzeug zum Lösen solcher Probleme ist”, sagt Andrew Gelman , Statistikprofessor von der Columbia-Universität in New York. Wie oft aber derart knifflige Aufgaben im realen Leben auftauchen, könne er nicht sagen. Was fast schon beruhigend klingt. OK, fine.
Introduction: Paul Nee sends in this amusing item: MELA Sciences claimed success in a clinical trial of its experimental skin cancer detection device only by altering the statistical method used to analyze the data in violation of an agreement with U.S. regulators, charges an independent healthcare analyst in a report issued last week. . . The BER report, however, relies on its own analysis to suggest that MELA struck out with FDA because the agency’s medical device reviewers discovered the MELAFind pivotal study failed to reach statistical significance despite the company’s claims to the contrary. And now here’s where it gets interesting: MELA claims that a phase III study of MELAFind met its primary endpoint by detecting accurately 112 of 114 eligible melanomas for a “sensitivity” rate of 98%. The lower confidence bound of the sensitivity analysis was 95.1%, which met the FDA’s standard for statistical significance in the study spelled out in a binding agreement with MELA, the compa
5 0.73668098 1279 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-24-ESPN is looking to hire a research analyst
Introduction: This is somebody’s dream job, I’m sure . . . ESPN is looking for a statistician to join the HR department as a Research Analyst . The job will consist of analytical research and producing statistics about the people that work at ESPN. Topics of interest will include productivity, efficiency, and retention of employees, among other items. In addition to data mining and producing reports, we also field surveys and analyze results. The position is located at the headquarters in Bristol, Connecticut, the same campus where nearly all ESPN shows are produced. ESPN is a Disney company, so discounts and free admission to Disney parks are available for employees. Flexible work arrangements are available, along with working in the New York City office part-time if desired. The role is a relatively new function and will have a high impact very quickly on helping the business function. Statistical software, text books, and any other resource needed to get the job done will be provided. T
7 0.73026198 398 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-06-Quote of the day
8 0.72444963 1731 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-21-If a lottery is encouraging addictive gambling, don’t expand it!
9 0.72387588 2 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-23-Modeling heterogenous treatment effects
10 0.72276759 177 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-02-Reintegrating rebels into civilian life: Quasi-experimental evidence from Burundi
11 0.71873653 1697 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-29-Where 36% of all boys end up nowadays
12 0.71312195 572 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-14-Desecration of valuable real estate
13 0.70866174 1115 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-12-Where are the larger-than-life athletes?
14 0.70460653 1487 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-08-Animated drought maps
15 0.70429945 700 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-06-Suspicious pattern of too-strong replications of medical research
16 0.70212996 609 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-13-Coauthorship norms
17 0.70055336 1598 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-30-A graphics talk with no visuals!
18 0.69866586 1025 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-24-Always check your evidence
19 0.69747806 1156 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-06-Bayesian model-building by pure thought: Some principles and examples
20 0.69337082 411 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-13-Ethical concerns in medical trials