andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1375 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Dan Kahan writes: We all know it’s ridiculous to be able to go on an fMRI fishing trip & resort to post hoc story-telling to explain the “significant” correlations one (inevitably) observes (good fMRI studies *don’t* do this; only bad ones do– to the injury of the reputation of all the scholars doing good studies of this kind). But now one doesn’t even need correlations that support the post-hoc inferences one is drawing. This one’s good. Kahan continues: Headline: Religious Experiences Shrink Part of the Brain text: ” … The study, published March 30 [2011] in PLoS One, showed greater atrophy in the hippocampus in individuals who identify with specific religious groups as well as those with no religious affiliation … The results showed significantly greater hippocampal atrophy in individuals reporting a life-changing religious experience. In addition, they found significantly greater hippocampal atrophy among born-again Protestants, Catholics, and those with no religiou
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 But now one doesn’t even need correlations that support the post-hoc inferences one is drawing. [sent-2, score-0.16]
2 In addition, they found significantly greater hippocampal atrophy among born-again Protestants, Catholics, and those with no religious affiliation, compared with Protestants not identifying as born-again. [sent-5, score-1.607]
3 But the article language actually tracks the abstract: “Significantly greater hippocampal atrophy was also observed from baseline to final assessment among born-again Protestants, Catholics, and those with no religious affiliation, compared with Protestants not identifying as born-again. [sent-8, score-1.747]
4 ” And this in text: “Table 2 presents longitudinal regression models of religious factors and covariates on change in left and right hippocampal volumes. [sent-9, score-0.955]
5 Reported life-changing religious experience at baseline was associated with greater atrophy between baseline and follow-up in the left and right hippocampus (left: b = −0. [sent-11, score-1.886]
6 Born-again Protestant group membership at baseline was associated with greater atrophy in the left and right hippocampus compared with non born-again Protestant group membership (left: b = −0. [sent-16, score-2.015]
7 046) and no religious group membership at baseline (n = 19) (b = −0. [sent-23, score-0.775]
8 046) were also associated with greater atrophy in the left hippocampus over time compared with non born-again Protestant group membership. [sent-25, score-1.364]
9 " And the authors really do *say* that these patterns support an inference that religious experiences affect the brain: "The findings of this study indicate that certain religious factors may influence longitudinal change in hippocampal volume during late life. [sent-28, score-1.252]
10 Greater hippocampal atrophy over time was predicted by baseline identification as born-again Protestants, Catholics, or no religious affiliation, compared with Protestants who were not born-again. [sent-29, score-1.429]
11 " You might wonder why Kahan is going to the trouble to tell me about a botched research report that made its way onto the pages of Scientific American. [sent-32, score-0.049]
12 Any individual case of bad science is surprising, but once it’s uncovered, it’s just one more ugly wreck on the side of the road. [sent-33, score-0.049]
13 Kahan explains that he had a therapeutic motivation: Anyway, thought focusing on this would help get your frustration about persistence of “what’s matter w/ Kansas” fallacy out of your system [see here and here ], since it’s impossible to be insanely frustrated about 2 things at once. [sent-34, score-0.254]
14 And, as a bonus: But also, so you get over being insanely frustrated at all, consider how satisfying it can be to consider a valid & interesting piece of research: Weisberg, D. [sent-35, score-0.206]
15 Cognitive Neuroscience 20, 470-477 (2008), which shows that people will accept fallacious inferences more readily when told that those inferences are supported by fMRI images. [sent-45, score-0.142]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('atrophy', 0.482), ('religious', 0.336), ('hippocampal', 0.321), ('protestants', 0.293), ('greater', 0.217), ('hippocampus', 0.214), ('baseline', 0.194), ('affiliation', 0.176), ('kahan', 0.16), ('membership', 0.157), ('protestant', 0.138), ('fmri', 0.138), ('left', 0.129), ('catholics', 0.127), ('insanely', 0.098), ('compared', 0.096), ('significantly', 0.092), ('group', 0.088), ('non', 0.073), ('neuroscience', 0.073), ('inferences', 0.071), ('frustrated', 0.071), ('longitudinal', 0.07), ('associated', 0.065), ('identifying', 0.063), ('brain', 0.057), ('right', 0.055), ('indicate', 0.054), ('experiences', 0.054), ('showed', 0.053), ('correlations', 0.052), ('text', 0.05), ('wreck', 0.049), ('allure', 0.049), ('botched', 0.049), ('individuals', 0.047), ('factors', 0.044), ('therapeutic', 0.044), ('resort', 0.044), ('hoc', 0.044), ('uncovered', 0.041), ('persistence', 0.041), ('catholic', 0.041), ('plos', 0.04), ('injury', 0.038), ('tracks', 0.038), ('inevitably', 0.038), ('kansas', 0.038), ('satisfying', 0.037), ('support', 0.037)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0000001 1375 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-11-The unitary nature of consciousness: “It’s impossible to be insanely frustrated about 2 things at once”
Introduction: Dan Kahan writes: We all know it’s ridiculous to be able to go on an fMRI fishing trip & resort to post hoc story-telling to explain the “significant” correlations one (inevitably) observes (good fMRI studies *don’t* do this; only bad ones do– to the injury of the reputation of all the scholars doing good studies of this kind). But now one doesn’t even need correlations that support the post-hoc inferences one is drawing. This one’s good. Kahan continues: Headline: Religious Experiences Shrink Part of the Brain text: ” … The study, published March 30 [2011] in PLoS One, showed greater atrophy in the hippocampus in individuals who identify with specific religious groups as well as those with no religious affiliation … The results showed significantly greater hippocampal atrophy in individuals reporting a life-changing religious experience. In addition, they found significantly greater hippocampal atrophy among born-again Protestants, Catholics, and those with no religiou
2 0.16287693 26 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-11-Update on religious affiliations of Supreme Court justices
Introduction: When Sonia Sotomayor was nominated for the Supreme Court, and there was some discussion of having 6 Roman Catholics on the court at the same time, I posted the following historical graph: It’s time for an update: It’s still gonna take awhile for the Catholics to catch up. . . . And this one might be relevant too: It looks as if Jews and men have been overrepresented, also Episcopalians (which, as I noted earlier, are not necessarily considered Protestant in terms of religious doctrine but which I counted as such for the ethnic categorization). Religion is an interesting political variable because it’s nominally about religious belief but typically seems to be more about ethnicity.
3 0.13347964 715 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-16-“It doesn’t matter if you believe in God. What matters is if God believes in you.”
Introduction: Mark Chaves sent me this great article on religion and religious practice: After reading a book or article in the scientific study of religion, I [Chaves] wonder if you ever find yourself thinking, “I just don’t believe it.” I have this experience uncomfortably often, and I think it’s because of a pervasive problem in the scientific study of religion. I want to describe that problem and how to overcome it. The problem is illustrated in a story told by Meyer Fortes. He once asked a rainmaker in a native culture he was studying to perform the rainmaking ceremony for him. The rainmaker refused, replying: “Don’t be a fool, whoever makes a rain-making ceremony in the dry season?” The problem is illustrated in a different way in a story told by Jay Demerath. He was in Israel, visiting friends for a Sabbath dinner. The man of the house, a conservative rabbi, stopped in the middle of chanting the prayers to say cheerfully: “You know, we don’t believe in any of this. But then in Judai
4 0.1072481 2004 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-01-Post-publication peer review: How it (sometimes) really works
Introduction: In an ideal world, research articles would be open to criticism and discussion in the same place where they are published, in a sort of non-corrupt version of Yelp. What is happening now is that the occasional paper or research area gets lots of press coverage, and this inspires reactions on science-focused blogs. The trouble here is that it’s easier to give off-the-cuff comments than detailed criticisms. Here’s an example. It starts a couple years ago with this article by Ryota Kanai, Tom Feilden, Colin Firth, and Geraint Rees, on brain size and political orientation: In a large sample of young adults, we related self-reported political attitudes to gray matter volume using structural MRI. We found that greater liberalism was associated with increased gray matter volume in the anterior cingulate cortex, whereas greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala. These results were replicated in an independent sample of additional participants. Ou
Introduction: I was reading this article by Ariel Levy in the New Yorker and noticed something suspicious. Levy was writing about an event in 1979 and then continued: One year later, Ronald Reagan won the Presidency, with overwhelming support from evangelicals. The evangelical vote has been a serious consideration in every election since. From Chapter 6 of Red State, Blue State : According to the National Election Study, Reagan did quite a bit worse than Carter among evangelical Protestants than among voters as a whole–no surprise, really, given that Reagan was not particularly religious and Cater was an evangelical himself. It was 1992, not 1980, when evangelicals really started to vote Republican. What’s it all about? I wouldn’t really blame Ariel Levy for this mistake; a glance at her website reveals a lot of experience as a writer and culture reporter but not much on statistics or politics. That’s fine by me: there’s a reason I subscribe to the New Yorker and not
6 0.080214843 1860 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-17-How can statisticians help psychologists do their research better?
7 0.077361763 1386 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-21-Belief in hell is associated with lower crime rates
8 0.077222288 1564 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-06-Choose your default, or your default will choose you (election forecasting edition)
9 0.073596641 1053 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-11-This one is so dumb it makes me want to barf
11 0.067554176 2006 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-03-Evaluating evidence from published research
12 0.066002816 1633 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-21-Kahan on Pinker on politics
13 0.06078203 288 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-21-Discussion of the paper by Girolami and Calderhead on Bayesian computation
14 0.056050915 1253 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-08-Technology speedup graph
15 0.054199949 1930 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-09-Symposium Magazine
16 0.054113854 2336 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-16-How much can we learn about individual-level causal claims from state-level correlations?
17 0.053236283 850 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-11-Understanding how estimates change when you move to a multilevel model
18 0.051958766 1414 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-12-Steven Pinker’s unconvincing debunking of group selection
19 0.051571477 1259 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-11-How things sound to us, versus how they sound to others
20 0.0501583 1932 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-10-Don’t trust the Turk
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.086), (1, -0.022), (2, 0.026), (3, -0.035), (4, -0.009), (5, -0.012), (6, -0.011), (7, -0.008), (8, -0.014), (9, 0.013), (10, -0.005), (11, 0.004), (12, 0.012), (13, 0.006), (14, 0.024), (15, 0.011), (16, 0.016), (17, -0.008), (18, 0.007), (19, -0.0), (20, -0.017), (21, -0.012), (22, -0.038), (23, -0.035), (24, 0.02), (25, 0.005), (26, 0.016), (27, -0.001), (28, -0.011), (29, -0.011), (30, -0.006), (31, -0.011), (32, 0.011), (33, -0.0), (34, -0.02), (35, -0.013), (36, -0.015), (37, 0.0), (38, 0.019), (39, 0.0), (40, 0.004), (41, -0.003), (42, 0.035), (43, -0.021), (44, -0.006), (45, -0.027), (46, 0.003), (47, 0.032), (48, 0.014), (49, -0.043)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.93752557 1375 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-11-The unitary nature of consciousness: “It’s impossible to be insanely frustrated about 2 things at once”
Introduction: Dan Kahan writes: We all know it’s ridiculous to be able to go on an fMRI fishing trip & resort to post hoc story-telling to explain the “significant” correlations one (inevitably) observes (good fMRI studies *don’t* do this; only bad ones do– to the injury of the reputation of all the scholars doing good studies of this kind). But now one doesn’t even need correlations that support the post-hoc inferences one is drawing. This one’s good. Kahan continues: Headline: Religious Experiences Shrink Part of the Brain text: ” … The study, published March 30 [2011] in PLoS One, showed greater atrophy in the hippocampus in individuals who identify with specific religious groups as well as those with no religious affiliation … The results showed significantly greater hippocampal atrophy in individuals reporting a life-changing religious experience. In addition, they found significantly greater hippocampal atrophy among born-again Protestants, Catholics, and those with no religiou
2 0.75479108 1414 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-12-Steven Pinker’s unconvincing debunking of group selection
Introduction: Steven Pinker writes : Human beings live in groups, are affected by the fortunes of their groups, and sometimes make sacrifices that benefit their groups. Does this mean that the human brain has been shaped by natural selection to promote the welfare of the group in competition with other groups, even when it damages the welfare of the person and his or her kin? . . . Several scientists whom I [Pinker] greatly respect have said so in prominent places. And they have gone on to use the theory of group selection to make eye-opening claims about the human condition. They have claimed that human morailty, particularly our willingness to engage in acts of altruism, can be explained as an adaptation to group-against-group competition. As E. O. Wilson explains, “In a group, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals. But, groups of altruistic individuals beat groups of selfish individuals.” . . . I [Pinker] am often asked whether I agree with the new group selectionists, and the q
3 0.72041029 48 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-23-The bane of many causes
Introduction: One of the newsflies buzzing around today is an article “Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case-control study” . The results, shown in this pretty table below, appear to be inconclusive. A limited amount of cellphone radiation is good for your brain, but not too much? It’s unfortunate that the extremes are truncated. The commentary at Microwave News blames bias: The problem with selection bias –also called participation bias– became apparent after the brain tumor risks observed throughout the study were so low as to defy reason. If they reflect reality, they would indicate that cell phones confer immediate protection against tumors. All sides agree that this is extremely unlikely. Further analysis pointed to unanticipated differences between the cases (those with brain tumors) and the controls (the reference group). The second problem concerns how accurately study participants could recall the amount of t
4 0.71953052 1082 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-25-Further evidence of a longstanding principle of statistics
Introduction: The principle is, Whatever you do, somebody in psychometrics already did it long before. The new evidence comes from an article by Lawrence Hubert and Howard Wainer: There are several issues with the use of ecological correlations: They tend to be a lot higher than individual-level correlations, and assuming what is seen at the group level also holds at the level of the individual is so pernicious, it has been labeled the “ecological fallacy” by Selvin (1958). The term ecological correlation was popularized from a 1950 article by William Robinson (Robinson, 1950), but the idea has been around for some time (e.g., see the 1939 article by E. L. Thorndike, On the Fallacy of Imputing Correlations Found for Groups to the Individuals or Smaller Groups Composing Them).
Introduction: Etienne LeBel writes: You’ve probably already seen it, but I thought you could have a lot of fun with this one!! The article , with the admirably clear title given above, is by James McNulty, Michael Olson, Andrea Meltzer, Matthew Shaffer, and begins as follows: For decades, social psychological theories have posited that the automatic processes captured by implicit measures have implications for social outcomes. Yet few studies have demonstrated any long-term implications of automatic processes, and some scholars have begun to question the relevance and even the validity of these theories. At baseline of our longitudinal study, 135 newlywed couples (270 individuals) completed an explicit measure of their conscious attitudes toward their relationship and an implicit measure of their automatic attitudes toward their partner. They then reported their marital satisfaction every 6 months for the next 4 years. We found no correlation between spouses’ automatic and conscious attitu
6 0.71353322 1633 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-21-Kahan on Pinker on politics
7 0.71247756 1128 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-19-Sharon Begley: Worse than Stephen Jay Gould?
8 0.70892823 600 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-04-“Social Psychologists Detect Liberal Bias Within”
9 0.70514381 715 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-16-“It doesn’t matter if you believe in God. What matters is if God believes in you.”
10 0.70173591 177 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-02-Reintegrating rebels into civilian life: Quasi-experimental evidence from Burundi
12 0.69436872 2220 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-22-Quickies
13 0.68823487 1947 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-20-We are what we are studying
16 0.67956108 2346 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-24-Buzzfeed, Porn, Kansas…That Can’t Be Good
17 0.67551112 1053 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-11-This one is so dumb it makes me want to barf
18 0.67075092 1114 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-12-Controversy about average personality differences between men and women
19 0.67068082 382 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-30-“Presidential Election Outcomes Directly Influence Suicide Rates”
20 0.65588737 828 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-28-Thoughts on Groseclose book on media bias
topicId topicWeight
[(16, 0.087), (21, 0.047), (24, 0.108), (53, 0.014), (55, 0.014), (72, 0.276), (84, 0.011), (86, 0.025), (89, 0.026), (98, 0.033), (99, 0.21)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.97991395 1935 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-12-“A tangle of unexamined emotional impulses and illogical responses”
Introduction: Tyler Cowen posts the following note from a taxi driver: I learned very early on to never drive someone to their destination if it was a route they drove themselves, say to their home from the airport . . . Everyone prides themselves on driving the shortest route but they rarely do. . . . When I first started driving a cab, I drove the shortest route—always, I’m ethical—but people would accuse me of taking the long way because it wasn’t the way they drove . . . In the end, experts they consider themselves to be, people are a tangle of unexamined emotional impulses and illogical responses. I take a lot of rides to and from the airport, and I can assure you that a lot of taxi drivers don’t know the good routes. Once I had to start screaming from the back seat to stop the guy from getting on the BQE. I don’t “pride myself” on knowing a good route home from the airport, but I prefer the good route. I’m guessing that the taxi driver quoted above is subject to the same illusions
2 0.9289397 737 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-30-Memorial Day question
Introduction: When I was a kid they shifted a bunch of holidays to Monday. (Not all the holidays: they kept New Year’s, Christmas, and July 4th on fixed dates, they kept Thanksgiving on a Thursday, and for some reason the shifted Veterans Day didn’t stick. But they successfully moved Washington’s Birthday, Memorial Day, and Columbus Day. It makes sense to give people a 3-day weekend. I have no idea why they picked Monday rather than Friday, but either one would do, I suppose. My question is: if this Monday holiday thing was such a good idea, why did it take them so long to do it?
same-blog 3 0.89725208 1375 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-11-The unitary nature of consciousness: “It’s impossible to be insanely frustrated about 2 things at once”
Introduction: Dan Kahan writes: We all know it’s ridiculous to be able to go on an fMRI fishing trip & resort to post hoc story-telling to explain the “significant” correlations one (inevitably) observes (good fMRI studies *don’t* do this; only bad ones do– to the injury of the reputation of all the scholars doing good studies of this kind). But now one doesn’t even need correlations that support the post-hoc inferences one is drawing. This one’s good. Kahan continues: Headline: Religious Experiences Shrink Part of the Brain text: ” … The study, published March 30 [2011] in PLoS One, showed greater atrophy in the hippocampus in individuals who identify with specific religious groups as well as those with no religious affiliation … The results showed significantly greater hippocampal atrophy in individuals reporting a life-changing religious experience. In addition, they found significantly greater hippocampal atrophy among born-again Protestants, Catholics, and those with no religiou
4 0.89306927 1179 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-21-“Readability” as freedom from the actual sensation of reading
Introduction: In her essay on Margaret Mitchell and Gone With the Wind, Claudia Roth Pierpoint writes: The much remarked “readability” of the book must have played a part in this smooth passage from the page to the screen, since “readability” has to do not only with freedom from obscurity but, paradoxically, with freedom from the actual sensation of reading [emphasis added]—of the tug and traction of words as they move thoughts into place in the mind. Requiring, in fact, the least reading, the most “readable” book allows its characters to slip easily through nets of words and into other forms. Popular art has been well defined by just this effortless movement from medium to medium, which is carried out, as Leslie Fiedler observed in relation to Uncle Tom’s Cabin, “without loss of intensity or alteration of meaning.” Isabel Archer rises from the page only in the hanging garments of Henry James’s prose, but Scarlett O’Hara is a free woman. Well put. I wish Pierpoint would come out with ano
5 0.87959254 741 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-02-At least he didn’t prove a false theorem
Introduction: Siobhan Mattison pointed me to this . I’m just disappointed they didn’t use my Fenimore Cooper line. Although I guess that reference wouldn’t resonate much outside the U.S. P.S. My guess was correct See comments below. Actually, the reference probably wouldn’t resonate so well among under-50-year-olds in the U.S. either. Sort of like the Jaycees story.
6 0.87957627 500 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-03-Bribing statistics
7 0.86713183 2331 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-12-On deck this week
8 0.86308217 268 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-10-Fighting Migraine with Multilevel Modeling
9 0.85929739 190 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-07-Mister P makes the big jump from the New York Times to the Washington Post
10 0.85712731 1381 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-16-The Art of Fielding
11 0.85426593 84 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-14-Is it 1930?
12 0.85244226 919 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-21-Least surprising headline of the year
13 0.83882451 1244 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-03-Meta-analyses of impact evaluations of aid programs
14 0.82601118 1113 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-11-Toshiro Kageyama on professionalism
15 0.82398129 68 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-03-…pretty soon you’re talking real money.
16 0.8112154 83 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-13-Silly Sas lays out old-fashioned statistical thinking
17 0.79991043 550 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-02-An IV won’t save your life if the line is tangled
18 0.79108024 1079 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-23-Surveys show Americans are populist class warriors, except when they aren’t
19 0.78565377 727 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-23-My new writing strategy