andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1338 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: From a few years ago : Both the papers sent to me appear to have strong research results. Now that the research has been done, I’d recommend rewriting both articles from scratch , using the following template: 1. Start with the conclusions. Write a couple pages on what you’ve found and what you recommend. In writing these conclusions, you should also be writing some of the introduction, in that you’ll need to give enough background so that general readers can understand what you’re talking about and why they should care. But you want to start with the conclusions, because that will determine what sort of background information you’ll need to give. 2. Now step back. What is the principal evidence for your conclusions? Make some graphs and pull out some key numbers that represent your research findings which back up your claims. 3. Back one more step, now. What are the methods and data you used to obtain your research findings. 4. Now go back and write the literature review
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 From a few years ago : Both the papers sent to me appear to have strong research results. [sent-1, score-0.173]
2 Now that the research has been done, I’d recommend rewriting both articles from scratch , using the following template: 1. [sent-2, score-0.464]
3 Write a couple pages on what you’ve found and what you recommend. [sent-4, score-0.088]
4 In writing these conclusions, you should also be writing some of the introduction, in that you’ll need to give enough background so that general readers can understand what you’re talking about and why they should care. [sent-5, score-0.634]
5 But you want to start with the conclusions, because that will determine what sort of background information you’ll need to give. [sent-6, score-0.552]
6 Make some graphs and pull out some key numbers that represent your research findings which back up your claims. [sent-10, score-0.646]
7 What are the methods and data you used to obtain your research findings. [sent-13, score-0.28]
8 Now go back and write the literature review and the introduction. [sent-15, score-0.41]
9 Moving forward one last time: go to your results and conclusions and give alternative explanations. [sent-17, score-0.714]
10 What are the limits of applicability of your findings? [sent-19, score-0.248]
11 What future research would be appropriate to follow up on these loose ends? [sent-20, score-0.306]
12 An easy way to start is to take the first sentence from each of the first five paragraphs of the article. [sent-23, score-0.457]
13 This probably won’t be quite right, but I bet it will be close to what you need. [sent-24, score-0.106]
14 Give the article to a friend, ask him or her to spend 15 minutes looking at it, then ask what they think your message was, and what evidence you have for it. [sent-26, score-0.709]
15 Your friend should read the article as a potential consumer, not as a critic. [sent-27, score-0.273]
16 You can find typos on your own time, but you need somebody else’s eyes to get a sense of the message you’re sending. [sent-28, score-0.647]
17 Also, (a) Don’t write something unless you expect people to read it. [sent-29, score-0.367]
18 (b) This principle holds for tables and figures as well. [sent-30, score-0.382]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('conclusions', 0.335), ('write', 0.192), ('friend', 0.182), ('start', 0.174), ('research', 0.173), ('message', 0.163), ('rewriting', 0.158), ('background', 0.152), ('typos', 0.144), ('step', 0.142), ('give', 0.139), ('back', 0.139), ('findings', 0.139), ('applicability', 0.135), ('ask', 0.133), ('need', 0.133), ('scratch', 0.133), ('loose', 0.133), ('template', 0.127), ('principal', 0.121), ('eyes', 0.121), ('introduction', 0.115), ('consumer', 0.115), ('limits', 0.113), ('evidence', 0.112), ('pull', 0.111), ('holds', 0.107), ('obtain', 0.107), ('paragraphs', 0.106), ('bet', 0.106), ('writing', 0.105), ('ends', 0.102), ('tables', 0.097), ('figures', 0.095), ('sentence', 0.094), ('determine', 0.093), ('minutes', 0.092), ('read', 0.091), ('pages', 0.088), ('moving', 0.088), ('somebody', 0.086), ('represent', 0.084), ('unless', 0.084), ('principle', 0.083), ('five', 0.083), ('forward', 0.081), ('alternative', 0.08), ('ll', 0.08), ('go', 0.079), ('spend', 0.076)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999988 1338 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-23-Advice on writing research articles
Introduction: From a few years ago : Both the papers sent to me appear to have strong research results. Now that the research has been done, I’d recommend rewriting both articles from scratch , using the following template: 1. Start with the conclusions. Write a couple pages on what you’ve found and what you recommend. In writing these conclusions, you should also be writing some of the introduction, in that you’ll need to give enough background so that general readers can understand what you’re talking about and why they should care. But you want to start with the conclusions, because that will determine what sort of background information you’ll need to give. 2. Now step back. What is the principal evidence for your conclusions? Make some graphs and pull out some key numbers that represent your research findings which back up your claims. 3. Back one more step, now. What are the methods and data you used to obtain your research findings. 4. Now go back and write the literature review
2 0.67716604 2172 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-14-Advice on writing research articles
Introduction: From a few years ago : General advice Both the papers sent to me appear to have strong research results. Now that the research has been done, I’d recommend rewriting both articles from scratch, using the following template: 1. Start with the conclusions. Write a couple pages on what you’ve found and what you recommend. In writing these conclusions, you should also be writing some of the introduction, in that you’ll need to give enough background so that general readers can understand what you’re talking about and why they should care. But you want to start with the conclusions, because that will determine what sort of background information you’ll need to give. 2. Now step back. What is the principal evidence for your conclusions? Make some graphs and pull out some key numbers that represent your research findings which back up your claims. 3. Back one more step, now. What are the methods and data you used to obtain your research findings. 4. Now go back and write the l
3 0.16315117 727 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-23-My new writing strategy
Introduction: In high school and college I would write long assignments using a series of outlines. I’d start with a single sheet where I’d write down the key phrases, connect them with lines, and then write more and more phrases until the page was filled up. Then I’d write a series of outlines, culminating in a sentence-level outline that was roughly one line per sentence of the paper. Then I’d write. It worked pretty well. Or horribly, depending on how you look at it. I was able to produce 10-page papers etc. on time. But I think it crippled my writing style for years. It’s taken me a long time to learn how to write directly–to explain clearly what I’ve done and why. And I’m still working on the “why” part. There’s a thin line between verbosity and terseness. I went to MIT and my roommate was a computer science major. He wrote me a word processor on his Atari 800, which did the job pretty well. For my senior thesis I broke down and used the computers in campus. I formatted it in tro
4 0.13278285 1658 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-07-Free advice from an academic writing coach!
Introduction: Basbøll writes : I [Basbøll] have got to come up with forty things to say [in the next few months]. . . . What would you like me to write about? I’ll of course be writing quite a bit about what I’m now calling “article design”, i.e., how to map out the roughly forty paragraphs that a journal article is composed of. And I’ll also be talking about how to plan the writing process that is to produce those paragraphs. The basic principle is still to write at least one paragraph a day in 27 minutes. (You can adapt this is various ways to your own taste; some like 18-minute or even 13-minute paragraphs.) But I’d like to talk about questions of style, too, and even a little bit about epistemology. “Knowledge—academic knowledge, that is—is the ability to compose a coherent prose paragraph about something in 27 minutes,” I always say. I’d like to reflect a little more about what this conception of knowledge really means. This means I’ll have to walk back my recent dismissal of epistemol
5 0.13007246 316 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-03-Suggested reading for a prospective statistician?
Introduction: Sam Jessup writes: I am writing to ask you to recommend papers, books–anything that comes to mind that might give a prospective statistician some sense of what the future holds for statistics (and statisticians). I have a liberal arts background with an emphasis in mathematics. It seems like this is an exciting time to be a statistician, but that’s just from the outside looking in. I’m curious about your perspective on the future of the discipline. Any recommendations? My favorite is still the book, “Statistics: A Guide to the Unknown,” first edition. (I actually have a chapter in the latest (fourth) edition, but I think the first edition (from 1972, I believe) is still the best.
6 0.12788235 1428 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-25-The problem with realistic advice?
8 0.11877493 2245 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-12-More on publishing in journals
9 0.11598078 995 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-06-Statistical models and actual models
10 0.11544818 1122 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-16-“Groundbreaking or Definitive? Journals Need to Pick One”
11 0.11214879 302 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-28-This is a link to a news article about a scientific paper
12 0.11119971 2018 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-12-Do you ever have that I-just-fit-a-model feeling?
13 0.10951751 1681 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-19-Participate in a short survey about the weight of evidence provided by statistics
14 0.10556886 2080 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-28-Writing for free
16 0.10327442 1289 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-29-We go to war with the data we have, not the data we want
17 0.10266876 2244 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-11-What if I were to stop publishing in journals?
18 0.10259791 61 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-31-A data visualization manifesto
19 0.10084995 1642 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-28-New book by Stef van Buuren on missing-data imputation looks really good!
20 0.10080568 1408 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-07-Not much difference between communicating to self and communicating to others
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.238), (1, -0.082), (2, -0.077), (3, -0.007), (4, 0.036), (5, -0.05), (6, 0.024), (7, -0.026), (8, 0.012), (9, -0.041), (10, 0.062), (11, -0.03), (12, 0.028), (13, -0.023), (14, 0.012), (15, 0.012), (16, -0.01), (17, -0.003), (18, -0.022), (19, 0.034), (20, 0.005), (21, -0.042), (22, 0.048), (23, 0.01), (24, -0.022), (25, -0.01), (26, 0.054), (27, -0.015), (28, 0.009), (29, 0.069), (30, 0.004), (31, 0.007), (32, -0.025), (33, 0.054), (34, 0.028), (35, -0.08), (36, -0.026), (37, -0.004), (38, 0.029), (39, -0.082), (40, 0.076), (41, 0.029), (42, 0.018), (43, 0.03), (44, 0.038), (45, -0.072), (46, -0.118), (47, -0.041), (48, -0.003), (49, 0.038)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.98448443 1338 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-23-Advice on writing research articles
Introduction: From a few years ago : Both the papers sent to me appear to have strong research results. Now that the research has been done, I’d recommend rewriting both articles from scratch , using the following template: 1. Start with the conclusions. Write a couple pages on what you’ve found and what you recommend. In writing these conclusions, you should also be writing some of the introduction, in that you’ll need to give enough background so that general readers can understand what you’re talking about and why they should care. But you want to start with the conclusions, because that will determine what sort of background information you’ll need to give. 2. Now step back. What is the principal evidence for your conclusions? Make some graphs and pull out some key numbers that represent your research findings which back up your claims. 3. Back one more step, now. What are the methods and data you used to obtain your research findings. 4. Now go back and write the literature review
2 0.95369524 2172 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-14-Advice on writing research articles
Introduction: From a few years ago : General advice Both the papers sent to me appear to have strong research results. Now that the research has been done, I’d recommend rewriting both articles from scratch, using the following template: 1. Start with the conclusions. Write a couple pages on what you’ve found and what you recommend. In writing these conclusions, you should also be writing some of the introduction, in that you’ll need to give enough background so that general readers can understand what you’re talking about and why they should care. But you want to start with the conclusions, because that will determine what sort of background information you’ll need to give. 2. Now step back. What is the principal evidence for your conclusions? Make some graphs and pull out some key numbers that represent your research findings which back up your claims. 3. Back one more step, now. What are the methods and data you used to obtain your research findings. 4. Now go back and write the l
3 0.83166802 727 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-23-My new writing strategy
Introduction: In high school and college I would write long assignments using a series of outlines. I’d start with a single sheet where I’d write down the key phrases, connect them with lines, and then write more and more phrases until the page was filled up. Then I’d write a series of outlines, culminating in a sentence-level outline that was roughly one line per sentence of the paper. Then I’d write. It worked pretty well. Or horribly, depending on how you look at it. I was able to produce 10-page papers etc. on time. But I think it crippled my writing style for years. It’s taken me a long time to learn how to write directly–to explain clearly what I’ve done and why. And I’m still working on the “why” part. There’s a thin line between verbosity and terseness. I went to MIT and my roommate was a computer science major. He wrote me a word processor on his Atari 800, which did the job pretty well. For my senior thesis I broke down and used the computers in campus. I formatted it in tro
4 0.79844069 1225 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-22-Procrastination as a positive productivity strategy
Introduction: Reading this amusing book review on willpower by Will Self ( link from Jenny Davidson) reminds me that recently [actually, several months ago; recall that most of this blog is published on a delay], I felt frustrated that I wasn’t getting anything done. I think that when I write this sort of thing it annoys people, because I’m lucky enough to be in a position to get a lot done—projects ranging from the ethics column to Stan—but I get frustrated when I spend a week trying to work, and then when the week’s over, I realize that all I did was respond to emails, review a bunch of journal submissions and grant proposals, and spend a lot of time staring into space while putting off whatever it was that I really thought I should be doing. I thought and thought, and I decided that my best strategy is what I call positive procrastination . Procrastination is of course typically considered a bad thing (or, as ironic-style writers would write, a Bad Thing). But you can actually use it, ju
5 0.78670937 1428 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-25-The problem with realistic advice?
Introduction: In an article entitled 16 Weeks, Thomas Basbøll ruthlessly lays out the time constraints that limit what a student will be able to write during a semester and recommends that students follow a plan: Try to be realistic. If you need time for “free writing” or “thought writing” (writing to find out what you think) book that into your calendar as well, but the important part of the challenge is to find time to write down what you already know needs to be written. If you don’t yet know what you’re going to say this semester, then your challenge is, in part, to figure that out. But you should still find at least 30 minutes a day to write down something you know you want to say. Keep in mind that we are only talking about sixteen weeks in the very near future. . . . Assuming that you do have something say, then, here’s the challenge: write always and only when (and what) your calendar tells you to. Don’t write when “inspired” to do so (unless this happens to coincide with your writing s
6 0.7635349 1658 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-07-Free advice from an academic writing coach!
7 0.75795484 1134 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-21-Lessons learned from a recent R package submission
8 0.75522184 2080 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-28-Writing for free
9 0.75190324 1502 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-19-Scalability in education
11 0.74181914 1117 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-13-What are the important issues in ethics and statistics? I’m looking for your input!
12 0.73829061 1351 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-29-A Ph.D. thesis is not really a marathon
13 0.73162133 1269 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-19-Believe your models (up to the point that you abandon them)
14 0.73009121 302 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-28-This is a link to a news article about a scientific paper
15 0.72845465 1408 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-07-Not much difference between communicating to self and communicating to others
16 0.72662252 278 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-15-Advice that might make sense for individuals but is negative-sum overall
17 0.7252686 955 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-12-Why it doesn’t make sense to chew people out for not reading the help page
18 0.72380769 2287 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-09-Advice: positive-sum, zero-sum, or negative-sum
19 0.719495 2225 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-26-A good comment on one of my papers
20 0.71787912 1520 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-03-Advice that’s so eminently sensible but so difficult to follow
topicId topicWeight
[(15, 0.014), (16, 0.038), (24, 0.258), (72, 0.011), (96, 0.19), (99, 0.398)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.9818629 327 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-07-There are never 70 distinct parameters
Introduction: Sam Seaver writes: I’m a graduate student in computational biology, and I’m relatively new to advanced statistics, and am trying to teach myself how best to approach a problem I have. My dataset is a small sparse matrix of 150 cases and 70 predictors, it is sparse as in many zeros, not many ‘NA’s. Each case is a nutrient that is fed into an in silico organism, and its response is whether or not it stimulates growth, and each predictor is one of 70 different pathways that the nutrient may or may not belong to. Because all of the nutrients do not belong to all of the pathways, there are thus many zeros in my matrix. My goal is to be able to use the pathways themselves to predict whether or not a nutrient could stimulate growth, thus I wanted to compute regression coefficients for each pathway, with which I could apply to other nutrients for other species. There are quite a few singularities in the dataset (summary(glm) reports that 14 coefficients are not defined because of sin
same-blog 2 0.97508949 1338 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-23-Advice on writing research articles
Introduction: From a few years ago : Both the papers sent to me appear to have strong research results. Now that the research has been done, I’d recommend rewriting both articles from scratch , using the following template: 1. Start with the conclusions. Write a couple pages on what you’ve found and what you recommend. In writing these conclusions, you should also be writing some of the introduction, in that you’ll need to give enough background so that general readers can understand what you’re talking about and why they should care. But you want to start with the conclusions, because that will determine what sort of background information you’ll need to give. 2. Now step back. What is the principal evidence for your conclusions? Make some graphs and pull out some key numbers that represent your research findings which back up your claims. 3. Back one more step, now. What are the methods and data you used to obtain your research findings. 4. Now go back and write the literature review
3 0.96961081 1731 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-21-If a lottery is encouraging addictive gambling, don’t expand it!
Introduction: This story from Vivian Yee seems just horrible to me. First the background: Pronto Lotto’s real business takes place in the carpeted, hushed area where its most devoted customers watch video screens from a scattering of tall silver tables, hour after hour, day after day. The players — mostly men, about a dozen at any given time — come on their lunch breaks or after work to study the screens, which are programmed with the Quick Draw lottery game, and flash a new set of winning numbers every four minutes. They have helped make Pronto Lotto the top Quick Draw vendor in the state, selling $3.3 million worth of tickets last year, more than $1 million more than the second busiest location, a World Books shop in Penn Station. Some stay for just a few minutes. Others play for the length of a workday, repeatedly traversing the few yards between their seats and the cash register as they hand the next wager to a clerk with a dollar bill or two, and return to wait. “It’s like my job, 24
4 0.96661735 1023 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-22-Going Beyond the Book: Towards Critical Reading in Statistics Teaching
Introduction: My article with the above title is appearing in the journal Teaching Statistics. Here’s the introduction: We can improve our teaching of statistical examples from books by collecting further data, reading cited articles and performing further data analysis. This should not come as a surprise, but what might be new is the realization of how close to the surface these research opportunities are: even influential and celebrated books can have examples where more can be learned with a small amount of additional effort. We discuss three examples that have arisen in our own teaching: an introductory textbook that motivated us to think more carefully about categorical and continuous variables; a book for the lay reader that misreported a study of menstruation and accidents; and a monograph on the foundations of probability that over interpreted statistically insignificant fluctuations in sex ratios. And here’s the conclusion: Individually, these examples are of little importance.
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
6 0.96127176 319 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-04-“Who owns Congress”
7 0.95653689 1306 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-07-Lists of Note and Letters of Note
8 0.95421422 2023 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-14-On blogging
9 0.95006025 2172 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-14-Advice on writing research articles
10 0.9492954 787 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-05-Different goals, different looks: Infovis and the Chris Rock effect
11 0.9356091 302 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-28-This is a link to a news article about a scientific paper
12 0.93542641 2090 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-05-How much do we trust a new claim that early childhood stimulation raised earnings by 42%?
13 0.9325093 2296 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-19-Index or indicator variables
14 0.93020797 1072 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-19-“The difference between . . .”: It’s not just p=.05 vs. p=.06
15 0.92843968 1966 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-03-Uncertainty in parameter estimates using multilevel models
16 0.92792255 1176 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-19-Standardized writing styles and standardized graphing styles
17 0.92752373 205 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-13-Arnold Zellner
18 0.9274931 934 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-30-Nooooooooooooooooooo!
19 0.92619002 1605 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-04-Write This Book
20 0.92599881 1941 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-16-Priors