andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1410 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Mark Patterson writes: I found a discussion at the Boston Review that I thought you’d be interested in, given your posts on the potentially dubious foundations of many neoclassical economics models. Michael Sandel cites a few examples of markets crowding out moral behavior. His longest discussion regards Frey and Oberholzer-Gee’s work demonstrating Swiss citizens’ willingness to admit a nuclear waste facility to town decreasing when offered monetary incentives. It seems like this is a situation that really demands a discussion of the available empirical evidence (Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini have two papers, “Pay Enough or Don’t Pay At All” and “A Fine is a Price” that seem especially relevant.) While the essay has sparked the usual sort of libertarian response, I’m struck by the fact that most people aren’t talking about the experimental work that’s actually available—it seems like this is the best way forward. My reply: I don’t have much to add here, but this sort
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Mark Patterson writes: I found a discussion at the Boston Review that I thought you’d be interested in, given your posts on the potentially dubious foundations of many neoclassical economics models. [sent-1, score-0.315]
2 Michael Sandel cites a few examples of markets crowding out moral behavior. [sent-2, score-0.185]
3 His longest discussion regards Frey and Oberholzer-Gee’s work demonstrating Swiss citizens’ willingness to admit a nuclear waste facility to town decreasing when offered monetary incentives. [sent-3, score-0.566]
4 It seems like this is a situation that really demands a discussion of the available empirical evidence (Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini have two papers, “Pay Enough or Don’t Pay At All” and “A Fine is a Price” that seem especially relevant. [sent-4, score-0.446]
5 ) While the essay has sparked the usual sort of libertarian response, I’m struck by the fact that most people aren’t talking about the experimental work that’s actually available—it seems like this is the best way forward. [sent-5, score-0.192]
6 My reply: I don’t have much to add here, but this sort of discussion is fun. [sent-6, score-0.13]
7 I hire postdocs and assistants and they are somewhat friend-like. [sent-13, score-0.161]
8 And sometimes I’m friends with students, who are (indirectly) hiring me. [sent-14, score-0.157]
9 I don’t know if Michael Sandel is friends with Anne T. [sent-15, score-0.157]
10 I agree with Patterson that it would be good to bring the discussion to the level of empirical research. [sent-18, score-0.276]
11 I was involved a couple years ago in a project involving the gift of low-cost stoves to poor people in Africa. [sent-20, score-0.187]
12 There’s been a debate for years about whether it’s better to give these sorts of things out for free, to sell them at or below cost, or to involve local middlemen who can make money off the deal. [sent-21, score-0.083]
13 This sort of decision arises in all sorts of development aid, from factories to mosquito nets, and there are persuasive arguments on all sides. [sent-22, score-0.369]
14 My impression is that the empirical work in this area leads to no clear conclusions, and I am suspicious of various clever-clever arguments in this area. [sent-23, score-0.247]
15 As I wrote in comments : Tautologically, all actions are self-interested in the sense that people are doing whatever they happen to be doing. [sent-25, score-0.309]
16 For example, if person A goes hungry so as to feed a complete stranger (person B) who is even hungrier, this could be viewed as self-interested in the sense that person A must have received some psychological benefit from it. [sent-26, score-0.585]
17 When we speak of “self-interest,” we’re going beyond this tautology to speak of actions that benefit oneself instrumentally. [sent-27, score-0.721]
18 ” Yes, you can define well-being completely tautologically to mean “whatever you happen do be doing” but that’s not very helpful. [sent-29, score-0.401]
19 I think it’s more reasonable to describe some–maybe most–of our actions as self-interested, but with other possible motivations also. [sent-30, score-0.22]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('sandel', 0.35), ('tautologically', 0.233), ('actions', 0.22), ('patterson', 0.213), ('friends', 0.157), ('empirical', 0.146), ('discussion', 0.13), ('person', 0.111), ('speak', 0.109), ('crowding', 0.106), ('factories', 0.106), ('neoclassical', 0.106), ('dale', 0.106), ('gneezy', 0.106), ('stoves', 0.106), ('webster', 0.106), ('benefit', 0.101), ('arguments', 0.101), ('tautology', 0.1), ('libertarian', 0.096), ('sparked', 0.096), ('longest', 0.096), ('stranger', 0.096), ('michael', 0.095), ('pay', 0.094), ('anne', 0.093), ('facility', 0.09), ('happen', 0.089), ('regards', 0.088), ('hungry', 0.088), ('swiss', 0.088), ('available', 0.086), ('citizens', 0.086), ('boston', 0.084), ('assistants', 0.084), ('demands', 0.084), ('nets', 0.084), ('sorts', 0.083), ('oneself', 0.082), ('nuclear', 0.081), ('gift', 0.081), ('decreasing', 0.081), ('persuasive', 0.079), ('dubious', 0.079), ('miller', 0.079), ('norm', 0.079), ('cites', 0.079), ('completely', 0.079), ('feed', 0.078), ('postdocs', 0.077)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 1410 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-09-Experimental work on market-based or non-market-based incentives
Introduction: Mark Patterson writes: I found a discussion at the Boston Review that I thought you’d be interested in, given your posts on the potentially dubious foundations of many neoclassical economics models. Michael Sandel cites a few examples of markets crowding out moral behavior. His longest discussion regards Frey and Oberholzer-Gee’s work demonstrating Swiss citizens’ willingness to admit a nuclear waste facility to town decreasing when offered monetary incentives. It seems like this is a situation that really demands a discussion of the available empirical evidence (Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini have two papers, “Pay Enough or Don’t Pay At All” and “A Fine is a Price” that seem especially relevant.) While the essay has sparked the usual sort of libertarian response, I’m struck by the fact that most people aren’t talking about the experimental work that’s actually available—it seems like this is the best way forward. My reply: I don’t have much to add here, but this sort
2 0.090944529 719 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-19-Everything is Obvious (once you know the answer)
Introduction: Duncan Watts gave his new book the above title, reflecting his irritation with those annoying people who, upon hearing of the latest social science research, reply with: Duh-I-knew-that. (I don’t know how to say Duh in Australian; maybe someone can translate that for me?) I, like Duncan, am easily irritated, and I looked forward to reading the book. I enjoyed it a lot, even though it has only one graph, and that graph has a problem with its y-axis. (OK, the book also has two diagrams and a graph of fake data, but that doesn’t count.) Before going on, let me say that I agree wholeheartedly with Duncan’s central point: social science research findings are often surprising, but the best results cause us to rethink our world in such a way that they seem completely obvious, in retrospect. (Don Rubin used to tell us that there’s no such thing as a “paradox”: once you fully understand a phenomenon, it should not seem paradoxical any more. When learning science, we sometimes speak
3 0.080730006 1170 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-16-A previous discussion with Charles Murray about liberals, conservatives, and social class
Introduction: From 2.5 years ago . Read all the comments; the discussion is helpful.
4 0.079987019 2245 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-12-More on publishing in journals
Introduction: I’m postponing today’s scheduled post (“Empirical implications of Empirical Implications of Theoretical Models”) to continue the lively discussion from yesterday, What if I were to stop publishing in journals? . An example: my papers with Basbøll Thomas Basbøll and I got into a long discussion on our blogs about business school professor Karl Weick and other cases of plagiarism copying text without attribution. We felt it useful to take our ideas to the next level and write them up as a manuscript, which ended up being logical to split into two papers. At that point I put some effort into getting these papers published, which I eventually did: To throw away data: Plagiarism as a statistical crime went into American Scientist and When do stories work? Evidence and illustration in the social sciences will appear in Sociological Methods and Research. The second paper, in particular, took some effort to place; I got some advice from colleagues in sociology as to where
5 0.079113916 109 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-25-Classics of statistics
Introduction: Christian Robert is planning a graduate seminar in which students read 15 classic articles of statistics. (See here for more details and a slightly different list.) Actually, he just writes “classics,” but based on his list, I assume he only wants articles, not books. If he wanted to include classic books, I’d nominate the following, just for starters: - Fisher’s Statistical Methods for Research Workers - Snedecor and Cochran’s Statistical Methods - Kish’s Survey Sampling - Box, Hunter, and Hunter’s Statistics for Experimenters - Tukey’s Exploratory Data Analysis - Cleveland’s The Elements of Graphing Data - Mosteller and Wallace’s book on the Federalist Papers. Probably Cox and Hinkley, too. That’s a book that I don’t think has aged well, but it seems to have had a big influence. I think there’s a lot more good and accessible material in these classic books than in the equivalent volume of classic articles. Journal articles can be difficult to read and are typicall
6 0.078435071 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote
7 0.077246964 2184 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-24-Parables vs. stories
8 0.074453488 1435 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-30-Retracted articles and unethical behavior in economics journals?
9 0.073931053 2084 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-01-Doing Data Science: What’s it all about?
10 0.073674262 395 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-Consulting: how do you figure out what to charge?
11 0.073421553 1832 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-29-The blogroll
12 0.072473645 1848 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-09-A tale of two discussion papers
13 0.071630798 901 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-12-Some thoughts on academic cheating, inspired by Frey, Wegman, Fischer, Hauser, Stapel
14 0.071221545 32 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-14-Causal inference in economics
15 0.068001367 1585 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-20-“I know you aren’t the plagiarism police, but . . .”
16 0.067951545 2282 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-05-Bizarre academic spam
17 0.066898927 157 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-21-Roller coasters, charity, profit, hmmm
18 0.066871323 1012 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-16-Blog bribes!
19 0.066694684 2133 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-13-Flexibility is good
20 0.065788113 2279 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-02-Am I too negative?
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.171), (1, -0.065), (2, -0.019), (3, -0.002), (4, -0.029), (5, -0.001), (6, 0.036), (7, -0.007), (8, 0.02), (9, 0.007), (10, -0.018), (11, 0.0), (12, 0.002), (13, 0.004), (14, 0.004), (15, -0.002), (16, 0.026), (17, 0.002), (18, 0.001), (19, 0.028), (20, 0.024), (21, -0.004), (22, 0.03), (23, -0.002), (24, -0.021), (25, 0.008), (26, 0.006), (27, -0.004), (28, -0.028), (29, 0.035), (30, -0.013), (31, 0.017), (32, 0.004), (33, -0.017), (34, -0.008), (35, -0.034), (36, 0.027), (37, 0.035), (38, 0.014), (39, 0.058), (40, -0.02), (41, -0.003), (42, -0.031), (43, -0.004), (44, -0.04), (45, 0.032), (46, -0.029), (47, -0.025), (48, -0.013), (49, 0.004)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.96686727 1410 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-09-Experimental work on market-based or non-market-based incentives
Introduction: Mark Patterson writes: I found a discussion at the Boston Review that I thought you’d be interested in, given your posts on the potentially dubious foundations of many neoclassical economics models. Michael Sandel cites a few examples of markets crowding out moral behavior. His longest discussion regards Frey and Oberholzer-Gee’s work demonstrating Swiss citizens’ willingness to admit a nuclear waste facility to town decreasing when offered monetary incentives. It seems like this is a situation that really demands a discussion of the available empirical evidence (Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini have two papers, “Pay Enough or Don’t Pay At All” and “A Fine is a Price” that seem especially relevant.) While the essay has sparked the usual sort of libertarian response, I’m struck by the fact that most people aren’t talking about the experimental work that’s actually available—it seems like this is the best way forward. My reply: I don’t have much to add here, but this sort
2 0.81926662 1717 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-10-Psychology can be improved by adding some economics
Introduction: On this blog I’ve occasionally written about the problems that arise when economists act as amateur psychologists. But the problem can go the other way, too. For example, consider this blog by Berit Brogaard and Kristian Marlow ( link from Abbas Raza). Brogaard and Marlow give several amusing stories about ripoffs (a restaurant that scams customers into buying expensive bottles of wine, a hairdresser that sucks customers into unnecessary treatments, a ghostwriter who takes thousands of dollars in payments and doesn’t do the job, etc.). Then they ask, “How did it happen? Why did you act in this impulsive way? Why didn’t you learn your lesson the first time around? Do you have some kind of brain damage?” They continue with some discussion of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex, the anterior insula, etc etc etc., and then conclude with the following advice: Is there anything we can do to avoid these moments of crazy decision-making? Yes but only by intentionally turning on our
3 0.81818122 668 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-19-The free cup and the extra dollar: A speculation in philosophy
Introduction: The following is an essay into a topic I know next to nothing about. As part of our endless discussion of Dilbert and Charlie Sheen, commenter Fraac linked to a blog by philosopher Edouard Machery, who tells a fascinating story : How do we think about the intentional nature of actions? And how do people with an impaired mindreading capacity think about it? Consider the following probes: The Free-Cup Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy the largest sized drink available. Before ordering, the cashier told him that if he bought a Mega-Sized Smoothie he would get it in a special commemorative cup. Joe replied, ‘I don’t care about a commemorative cup, I just want the biggest smoothie you have.’ Sure enough, Joe received the Mega-Sized Smoothie in a commemorative cup. Did Joe intentionally obtain the commemorative cup? The Extra-Dollar Case Joe was feeling quite dehydrated, so he stopped by the local smoothie shop to buy
Introduction: Sandeep Baliga writes : [In a recent study , Gilles Duranton and Matthew Turner write:] For interstate highways in metropolitan areas we [Duranton and Turner] find that VKT (vehicle kilometers traveled) increases one for one with interstate highways, confirming the fundamental law of highway congestion.’ Provision of public transit also simply leads to the people taking public transport being replaced by drivers on the road. Therefore: These findings suggest that both road capacity expansions and extensions to public transit are not appropriate policies with which to combat traffic congestion. This leaves congestion pricing as the main candidate tool to curb traffic congestion. To which I reply: Sure, if your goal is to curb traffic congestion . But what sort of goal is that? Thinking like a microeconomist, my policy goal is to increase people’s utility. Sure, traffic congestion is annoying, but there must be some advantages to driving on that crowded road or pe
5 0.80763578 2123 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-04-Tesla fires!
Introduction: Paul Kedrosky writes: Curious if you’ve looked at the current debate about Tesla fires, statistically speaking. Lots of arm-waving about true/sample proportions, sample sizes, normal approximations, etc. Would love to see a blog post if it intrigues you at all. I hadn’t heard about this at all! I mean, sure, I’d heard of Tesla, this is an electric car being built by some eccentric billionaire . But I didn’t know they were catching on fire! At this point I was curious so I followed the link. It was an interesting discussion to read, partly because some of the commenters were so open about their financial interests; for example , i felt like now is a good time to share some of my insights, specifically regarding the tesla fires. i know many people won’t like to hear what i have to say. and i don’t have a longer term holding in tesla any more, although sometimes i day-trade tesla from the long or short side. tesla has been kind to me, both as an investor and model s
6 0.80734497 525 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-19-Thiel update
7 0.80394602 482 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-23-Capitalism as a form of voluntarism
9 0.79563743 2053 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-06-Ideas that spread fast and slow
10 0.79188907 1105 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-08-Econ debate about prices at a fancy restaurant
11 0.78805155 1621 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-13-Puzzles of criminal justice
12 0.78759044 2158 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-03-Booze: Been There. Done That.
14 0.77813876 1850 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-10-The recursion of pop-econ
15 0.77780265 889 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-04-The acupuncture paradox
16 0.77759933 420 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-18-Prison terms for financial fraud?
17 0.7772724 333 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-10-Psychiatric drugs and the reduction in crime
18 0.77566022 1789 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-05-Elites have alcohol problems too!
19 0.7746675 2216 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-18-Florida backlash
20 0.77344292 1623 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-14-GiveWell charity recommendations
topicId topicWeight
[(2, 0.02), (9, 0.043), (15, 0.014), (16, 0.05), (21, 0.027), (23, 0.173), (24, 0.147), (36, 0.014), (53, 0.013), (72, 0.022), (86, 0.035), (99, 0.3)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.95964164 453 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-07-Biostatistics via Pragmatic and Perceptive Bayes.
Introduction: This conference touches nicely on many of the more Biostatistics related topics that have come up on this blog from a pragmatic and perceptive Bayesian perspective. Fourth Annual Bayesian Biostatistics Conference Including the star of that recent Cochrane TV debate who will be the key note speaker. See here Subtle statistical issues to be debated on TV. and perhaps the last comment which is my personal take on that debate. Reruns are still available here http://justin.tv/cochranetv/b/272278382 K?
2 0.95752394 1513 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-27-Estimating seasonality with a data set that’s just 52 weeks long
Introduction: Kaiser asks: Trying to figure out what are some keywords to research for this problem I’m trying to solve. I need to estimate seasonality but without historical data. What I have are multiple time series of correlated metrics (think department store sales, movie receipts, etc.) but all of them for 52 weeks only. I’m thinking that if these metrics are all subject to some underlying seasonality, I should be able to estimate that without needing prior years data. My reply: Can I blog this and see if the hive mind responds? I’m not an expert on this one. My first thought is to fit an additive model including date effects, with some sort of spline on the date effects along with day-of-week effects, idiosyncratic date effects (July 4th, Christmas, etc.), and possible interactions. Actually, I’d love to fit something like that in Stan, just to see how it turns out. It could be a tangled mess but it could end up working really well!
3 0.95285195 203 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-12-John McPhee, the Anti-Malcolm
Introduction: This blog is threatening to turn into Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, Social Science, and Literature Criticism, but I’m just going to go with the conversational flow, so here’s another post about an essayist. I’m not a big fan of Janet Malcolm’s essays — and I don’t mean I don’t like her attitude or her pro-murderer attitude, I mean I don’t like them all that much as writing. They’re fine, I read them, they don’t bore me, but I certainly don’t think she’s “our” best essayist. But that’s not a debate I want to have right now, and if I did I’m quite sure most of you wouldn’t want to read it anyway. So instead, I’ll just say something about John McPhee. As all right-thinking people agree, in McPhee’s long career he has written two kinds of books: good, short books, and bad, long books. (He has also written many New Yorker essays, and perhaps other essays for other magazines too; most of these are good, although I haven’t seen any really good recent work from him, and so
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
same-blog 5 0.9505657 1410 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-09-Experimental work on market-based or non-market-based incentives
Introduction: Mark Patterson writes: I found a discussion at the Boston Review that I thought you’d be interested in, given your posts on the potentially dubious foundations of many neoclassical economics models. Michael Sandel cites a few examples of markets crowding out moral behavior. His longest discussion regards Frey and Oberholzer-Gee’s work demonstrating Swiss citizens’ willingness to admit a nuclear waste facility to town decreasing when offered monetary incentives. It seems like this is a situation that really demands a discussion of the available empirical evidence (Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini have two papers, “Pay Enough or Don’t Pay At All” and “A Fine is a Price” that seem especially relevant.) While the essay has sparked the usual sort of libertarian response, I’m struck by the fact that most people aren’t talking about the experimental work that’s actually available—it seems like this is the best way forward. My reply: I don’t have much to add here, but this sort
7 0.92565811 2021 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-13-Swiss Jonah Lehrer
8 0.92364466 1590 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-26-I need a title for my book on ethics and statistics!!
9 0.91479445 2216 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-18-Florida backlash
10 0.90850937 532 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-23-My Wall Street Journal story
11 0.90348935 578 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-17-Credentialism, elite employment, and career aspirations
12 0.89882004 731 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-26-Lottery probability update
15 0.88807511 2296 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-19-Index or indicator variables
16 0.88410318 1976 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-10-The birthday problem
17 0.88402075 18 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-06-$63,000 worth of abusive research . . . or just a really stupid waste of time?
18 0.88336116 2173 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-15-Postdoc involving pathbreaking work in MRP, Stan, and the 2014 election!
19 0.88254285 2337 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-18-Never back down: The culture of poverty and the culture of journalism
20 0.8825115 1695 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-28-Economists argue about Bayes