andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1532 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining

1532 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-13-A real-life dollar auction game!


meta infos for this blog

Source: html

Introduction: Actually, $100,000 auction. I learned about it after seeing the following email which was broadcast to a couple of mailing lists: Dear all, I am now writing about something completely different! I need your help “voting” for our project, and sending this e-mail to others so that they can also vote for our project. As you will see from the video, the project would fund *** Project: I am a finalist for a $100,000 prize from Brigham and Women’s Hospital. My project is to understand how ***. Ultimately, we want to develop a ***. We expect that this ** can be used to *** Here are the instructions: 1. Go to the web page: http://brighamandwomens.org/research/BFF/default.aspx 2. scroll to the bottom and follow the link to “Vote” 3. select project #** 4. FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN. Best regards, ** I love that step 4 is in ALL CAPS, just to give it that genuine chain-letter aura. Isn’t this weird? First, that this foundation would give ou


Summary: the most important sentenses genereted by tfidf model

sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore

1 I learned about it after seeing the following email which was broadcast to a couple of mailing lists: Dear all, I am now writing about something completely different! [sent-2, score-0.225]

2 I need your help “voting” for our project, and sending this e-mail to others so that they can also vote for our project. [sent-3, score-0.467]

3 As you will see from the video, the project would fund *** Project: I am a finalist for a $100,000 prize from Brigham and Women’s Hospital. [sent-4, score-0.499]

4 scroll to the bottom and follow the link to “Vote” 3. [sent-11, score-0.182]

5 Best regards, ** I love that step 4 is in ALL CAPS, just to give it that genuine chain-letter aura. [sent-14, score-0.118]

6 First, that this foundation would give out $100,000 based on an internet ballot where anyone can vote, second that this guy who I’ve never met would spam me to vote for him. [sent-16, score-1.101]

7 He’s spamming academic lists, but I bet one of the other contestants is paying 100,000 people on Mechanical Turk to vote for him at a cost of 10 cents each. [sent-18, score-0.928]

8 I think what the foundation should do is set up the voting so that each vote corresponds to a 10-cent contribution to the fund. [sent-21, score-0.928]

9 And then make public the total votes for each proposal. [sent-22, score-0.164]

10 Then each contestant will be motivated to get just a few more votes, just a few more. [sent-23, score-0.143]

11 and eventually the foundation will raise hundreds of thousands of dollars from these guys, all competing for the fixed $100,000 prize. [sent-27, score-0.653]

12 Much better than someone spamming me to “FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN. [sent-29, score-0.249]


similar blogs computed by tfidf model

tfidf for this blog:

wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)

[('vote', 0.379), ('project', 0.305), ('spamming', 0.249), ('foundation', 0.244), ('lists', 0.186), ('votes', 0.164), ('contestant', 0.143), ('brigham', 0.143), ('voting', 0.137), ('forward', 0.133), ('cents', 0.129), ('regards', 0.118), ('genuine', 0.118), ('guy', 0.115), ('mailing', 0.115), ('ballot', 0.113), ('broadcast', 0.11), ('savvy', 0.105), ('turk', 0.105), ('scroll', 0.104), ('instructions', 0.102), ('fund', 0.1), ('dear', 0.098), ('video', 0.096), ('dude', 0.096), ('mechanical', 0.096), ('dollar', 0.096), ('net', 0.095), ('prize', 0.094), ('spam', 0.093), ('brings', 0.09), ('competing', 0.088), ('sending', 0.088), ('corresponds', 0.088), ('select', 0.088), ('bet', 0.086), ('gon', 0.086), ('paying', 0.085), ('weird', 0.085), ('raise', 0.084), ('hundreds', 0.081), ('contribution', 0.08), ('na', 0.08), ('met', 0.079), ('lose', 0.078), ('bottom', 0.078), ('eventually', 0.078), ('dollars', 0.078), ('internet', 0.078), ('develop', 0.076)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 0.99999982 1532 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-13-A real-life dollar auction game!

Introduction: Actually, $100,000 auction. I learned about it after seeing the following email which was broadcast to a couple of mailing lists: Dear all, I am now writing about something completely different! I need your help “voting” for our project, and sending this e-mail to others so that they can also vote for our project. As you will see from the video, the project would fund *** Project: I am a finalist for a $100,000 prize from Brigham and Women’s Hospital. My project is to understand how ***. Ultimately, we want to develop a ***. We expect that this ** can be used to *** Here are the instructions: 1. Go to the web page: http://brighamandwomens.org/research/BFF/default.aspx 2. scroll to the bottom and follow the link to “Vote” 3. select project #** 4. FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN. Best regards, ** I love that step 4 is in ALL CAPS, just to give it that genuine chain-letter aura. Isn’t this weird? First, that this foundation would give ou

2 0.20139068 389 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-01-Why it can be rational to vote

Introduction: I think I can best do my civic duty by running this one every Election Day, just like Art Buchwald on Thanksgiving. . . . With a national election coming up, and with the publicity at its maximum, now is a good time to ask, is it rational for you to vote? And, by extension, wass it worth your while to pay attention to whatever the candidates and party leaders have been saying for the year or so? With a chance of casting a decisive vote that is comparable to the chance of winning the lottery, what is the gain from being a good citizen and casting your vote? The short answer is, quite a lot. First the bad news. With 100 million voters, your chance that your vote will be decisive–even if the national election is predicted to be reasonably close–is, at best, 1 in a million in a battleground district and much less in a noncompetitive district such as where I live. (The calculation is based on the chance that your district’s vote will be exactly tied, along with the chance that your di

3 0.20139068 1565 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-06-Why it can be rational to vote

Introduction: I think I can best do my civic duty by running this one every Election Day, just like Art Buchwald on Thanksgiving. . . . With a national election coming up, and with the publicity at its maximum, now is a good time to ask, is it rational for you to vote? And, by extension, wass it worth your while to pay attention to whatever the candidates and party leaders have been saying for the year or so? With a chance of casting a decisive vote that is comparable to the chance of winning the lottery, what is the gain from being a good citizen and casting your vote? The short answer is, quite a lot. First the bad news. With 100 million voters, your chance that your vote will be decisive–even if the national election is predicted to be reasonably close–is, at best, 1 in a million in a battleground district and much less in a noncompetitive district such as where I live. (The calculation is based on the chance that your district’s vote will be exactly tied, along with the chance that you

4 0.17836568 1027 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-25-Note to student journalists: Google is your friend

Introduction: A student journalist called me with some questions about when the U.S. would have a female president. At one point she asked if there were any surveys of whether people would vote for a woman. I suggested she try Google. I was by my computer anyway so typed “what percentage of americans would vote for a woman president” (without the quotation marks), and the very first hit was this from Gallup, from 2007: The Feb. 9-11, 2007, poll asked Americans whether they would vote for “a generally well-qualified” presidential candidate nominated by their party with each of the following characteristics: Jewish, Catholic, Mormon, an atheist, a woman, black, Hispanic, homosexual, 72 years of age, and someone married for the third time. Between now and the 2008 political conventions, there will be discussion about the qualifications of presidential candidates — their education, age, religion, race, and so on. If your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happene

5 0.16810575 1566 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-07-A question about voting systems—unrelated to U.S. elections!

Introduction: Jan Vecer writes about a new voting system that is now being considered in the Czech Republic which faces a political crisis where some elected officials became corrupted: I came across a new suggestion about a voting system. The proposal is that in each electoral district the voter chooses 2 candidates (plus vote), but also chooses one candidate with a minus vote. Two top candidates with the highest vote count (= number of plus votes – number of minus votes) are elected to a parliament. There are 81 districts in total, the parliament would have 162 members if the proposal goes through. The intention of the negative vote is to eliminate controversial candidates. Are there any clear advantages over the classical “select one candidate” system? Or disadvantages? Any thoughts on this? I am not an expert on this topic but maybe some of you are.

6 0.15762481 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote

7 0.14191604 1227 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-23-Voting patterns of America’s whites, from the masses to the elites

8 0.13897443 1544 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-22-Is it meaningful to talk about a probability of “65.7%” that Obama will win the election?

9 0.13773151 369 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-25-Misunderstanding of divided government

10 0.1228807 1823 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-24-The Tweets-Votes Curve

11 0.11677191 1373 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-09-Cognitive psychology research helps us understand confusion of Jonathan Haidt and others about working-class voters

12 0.11667998 355 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-20-Andy vs. the Ideal Point Model of Voting

13 0.11567002 125 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-02-The moral of the story is, Don’t look yourself up on Google

14 0.1151834 292 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-23-Doug Hibbs on the fundamentals in 2010

15 0.10746963 162 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-25-Darn that Lindsey Graham! (or, “Mr. P Predicts the Kagan vote”)

16 0.10473991 1574 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-12-How to Lie With Statistics example number 12,498,122

17 0.10318539 692 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-03-“Rationality” reinforces, does not compete with, other models of behavior

18 0.10298596 1229 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-25-Same old story

19 0.10235496 1372 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-08-Stop me before I aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

20 0.1018772 1014 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-16-Visualizations of NYPD stop-and-frisk data


similar blogs computed by lsi model

lsi for this blog:

topicId topicWeight

[(0, 0.142), (1, -0.089), (2, 0.083), (3, 0.088), (4, -0.022), (5, 0.039), (6, -0.027), (7, -0.066), (8, -0.026), (9, -0.083), (10, 0.055), (11, -0.005), (12, 0.084), (13, -0.07), (14, -0.028), (15, 0.032), (16, 0.037), (17, -0.032), (18, 0.012), (19, 0.026), (20, -0.002), (21, -0.033), (22, 0.083), (23, -0.101), (24, -0.051), (25, -0.029), (26, 0.068), (27, 0.021), (28, -0.058), (29, 0.007), (30, -0.055), (31, -0.024), (32, 0.005), (33, 0.005), (34, 0.058), (35, -0.009), (36, 0.066), (37, -0.042), (38, -0.099), (39, 0.063), (40, -0.003), (41, -0.052), (42, -0.014), (43, 0.029), (44, -0.016), (45, -0.057), (46, -0.009), (47, 0.001), (48, -0.045), (49, -0.027)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 0.96968395 1532 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-13-A real-life dollar auction game!

Introduction: Actually, $100,000 auction. I learned about it after seeing the following email which was broadcast to a couple of mailing lists: Dear all, I am now writing about something completely different! I need your help “voting” for our project, and sending this e-mail to others so that they can also vote for our project. As you will see from the video, the project would fund *** Project: I am a finalist for a $100,000 prize from Brigham and Women’s Hospital. My project is to understand how ***. Ultimately, we want to develop a ***. We expect that this ** can be used to *** Here are the instructions: 1. Go to the web page: http://brighamandwomens.org/research/BFF/default.aspx 2. scroll to the bottom and follow the link to “Vote” 3. select project #** 4. FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN. Best regards, ** I love that step 4 is in ALL CAPS, just to give it that genuine chain-letter aura. Isn’t this weird? First, that this foundation would give ou

2 0.86840814 1566 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-07-A question about voting systems—unrelated to U.S. elections!

Introduction: Jan Vecer writes about a new voting system that is now being considered in the Czech Republic which faces a political crisis where some elected officials became corrupted: I came across a new suggestion about a voting system. The proposal is that in each electoral district the voter chooses 2 candidates (plus vote), but also chooses one candidate with a minus vote. Two top candidates with the highest vote count (= number of plus votes – number of minus votes) are elected to a parliament. There are 81 districts in total, the parliament would have 162 members if the proposal goes through. The intention of the negative vote is to eliminate controversial candidates. Are there any clear advantages over the classical “select one candidate” system? Or disadvantages? Any thoughts on this? I am not an expert on this topic but maybe some of you are.

3 0.82533753 1027 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-25-Note to student journalists: Google is your friend

Introduction: A student journalist called me with some questions about when the U.S. would have a female president. At one point she asked if there were any surveys of whether people would vote for a woman. I suggested she try Google. I was by my computer anyway so typed “what percentage of americans would vote for a woman president” (without the quotation marks), and the very first hit was this from Gallup, from 2007: The Feb. 9-11, 2007, poll asked Americans whether they would vote for “a generally well-qualified” presidential candidate nominated by their party with each of the following characteristics: Jewish, Catholic, Mormon, an atheist, a woman, black, Hispanic, homosexual, 72 years of age, and someone married for the third time. Between now and the 2008 political conventions, there will be discussion about the qualifications of presidential candidates — their education, age, religion, race, and so on. If your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happene

4 0.80726975 389 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-01-Why it can be rational to vote

Introduction: I think I can best do my civic duty by running this one every Election Day, just like Art Buchwald on Thanksgiving. . . . With a national election coming up, and with the publicity at its maximum, now is a good time to ask, is it rational for you to vote? And, by extension, wass it worth your while to pay attention to whatever the candidates and party leaders have been saying for the year or so? With a chance of casting a decisive vote that is comparable to the chance of winning the lottery, what is the gain from being a good citizen and casting your vote? The short answer is, quite a lot. First the bad news. With 100 million voters, your chance that your vote will be decisive–even if the national election is predicted to be reasonably close–is, at best, 1 in a million in a battleground district and much less in a noncompetitive district such as where I live. (The calculation is based on the chance that your district’s vote will be exactly tied, along with the chance that your di

5 0.80726975 1565 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-06-Why it can be rational to vote

Introduction: I think I can best do my civic duty by running this one every Election Day, just like Art Buchwald on Thanksgiving. . . . With a national election coming up, and with the publicity at its maximum, now is a good time to ask, is it rational for you to vote? And, by extension, wass it worth your while to pay attention to whatever the candidates and party leaders have been saying for the year or so? With a chance of casting a decisive vote that is comparable to the chance of winning the lottery, what is the gain from being a good citizen and casting your vote? The short answer is, quite a lot. First the bad news. With 100 million voters, your chance that your vote will be decisive–even if the national election is predicted to be reasonably close–is, at best, 1 in a million in a battleground district and much less in a noncompetitive district such as where I live. (The calculation is based on the chance that your district’s vote will be exactly tied, along with the chance that you

6 0.75998831 123 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-01-Truth in headlines

7 0.74328476 283 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-17-Vote Buying: Evidence from a List Experiment in Lebanon

8 0.73736161 692 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-03-“Rationality” reinforces, does not compete with, other models of behavior

9 0.73436558 369 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-25-Misunderstanding of divided government

10 0.71270186 1227 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-23-Voting patterns of America’s whites, from the masses to the elites

11 0.68854016 1373 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-09-Cognitive psychology research helps us understand confusion of Jonathan Haidt and others about working-class voters

12 0.6879279 934 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-30-Nooooooooooooooooooo!

13 0.65216696 1000 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-10-Forecasting 2012: How much does ideology matter?

14 0.64600283 279 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-15-Electability and perception of electability

15 0.62897283 1229 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-25-Same old story

16 0.62275517 1372 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-08-Stop me before I aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

17 0.60538346 681 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-26-Worst statistical graphic I have seen this year

18 0.60212964 654 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-09-There’s no evidence that voters choose presidential candidates based on their looks

19 0.59855819 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote

20 0.59694225 1593 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-27-Why aren’t Asians Republicans? For one thing, more than half of them live in California, New York, New Jersey, and Hawaii


similar blogs computed by lda model

lda for this blog:

topicId topicWeight

[(6, 0.011), (9, 0.339), (16, 0.081), (24, 0.138), (35, 0.015), (65, 0.023), (86, 0.017), (98, 0.019), (99, 0.248)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

1 0.98954302 577 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-16-Annals of really really stupid spam

Introduction: This came in the inbox today: Dear Dr. Gelman, GenWay recently found your article titled “Multiple imputation for model checking: completed-data plots with missing and latent data.” (Biometrics. 2005 Mar;61(1):74-85.) and thought you might be interested in learning about our superior quality signaling proteins. GenWay prides itself on being a leader in customer service aiming to exceed your expectations with the quality and price of our products. With more than 60,000 reagents backed by our outstanding guarantee you are sure to find the products you have been searching for. Please feel free to visit the following resource pages: * Apoptosis Pathway (product list) * Adipocytokine (product list) * Cell Cycle Pathway (product list) * Jak STAT (product list) * GnRH (product list) * MAPK (product list) * mTOR (product list) * T Cell Receptor (product list) * TGF-beta (product list) * Wnt (product list) * View All Pathways

2 0.98633784 993 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-05-The sort of thing that gives technocratic reasoning a bad name

Introduction: 1. Freakonomics characterizes drunk driving as an example of “the human tendency to worry about rare problems that are unlikely to happen.” 2. The CDC reports , “Alcohol-impaired drivers are involved in about 1 in 3 crash deaths, resulting in nearly 11,000 deaths in 2009.” No offense to the tenured faculty at the University of Chicago, but I’m going with the CDC on this one. P.S. The Freakonomics blog deserves to be dinged another time, not just for claiming, based on implausible assumptions and making the all-else-equal fallacy that “drunk walking is 8 times more likely to result in your death than drunk driving” but for presenting this weak inference as a fact rather than as a speculation. When doing “Freakonomics,” you can be counterintuitive, or you can be sensible, but it’s hard to be both. I mean, sure, sometimes you can be. But there’s a tradeoff, and in this case, they’re choosing to push the envelope on counterintuitiveness.

3 0.95238745 1356 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-31-Question 21 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys

Introduction: 21. A country is divided into three regions with populations of 2 million, 2 million, and 0.5 million, respectively. A survey is done asking about foreign policy opinions.. Somebody proposes taking a sample of 50 people from each reason. Give a reason why this non-proportional sample would not usually be done, and also a reason why it might actually be a good idea. Solution to question 20 From yesterday : 20. Explain in two sentences why we expect survey respondents to be honest about vote preferences but possibly dishonest about reporting unhealty behaviors. Solution: Respondents tend to be sincere about vote preferences because this affects the outcome of the poll, and people are motivated to have their candidate poll well. This motivation is typically not present in reporting behaviors; you have no particular reason for wanting to affect the average survey response.

4 0.94855011 1291 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-30-Systematic review of publication bias in studies on publication bias

Introduction: Via Yalda Afshar , a 2005 paper by Hans-Hermann Dubben and Hans-Peter Beck-Bornholdt: Publication bias is a well known phenomenon in clinical literature, in which positive results have a better chance of being published, are published earlier, and are published in journals with higher impact factors. Conclusions exclusively based on published studies, therefore, can be misleading. Selective under-reporting of research might be more widespread and more likely to have adverse consequences for patients than publication of deliberately falsified data. We investigated whether there is preferential publication of positive papers on publication bias. They conclude, “We found no evidence of publication bias in reports on publication bias.” But of course that’s the sort of finding regarding publication bias of findings on publication bias that you’d expect would get published. What we really need is a careful meta-analysis to estimate the level of publication bias in studies of publi

5 0.92901629 529 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-21-“City Opens Inquiry on Grading Practices at a Top-Scoring Bronx School”

Introduction: Sharon Otterman reports : When report card grades were released in the fall for the city’s 455 high schools, the highest score went to a small school in a down-and-out section of the Bronx . . . A stunning 94 percent of its seniors graduated, more than 30 points above the citywide average. . . . “When I interviewed for the school,” said Sam Buchbinder, a history teacher, “it was made very clear: this is a school that doesn’t believe in anyone failing.” That statement was not just an exhortation to excellence. It was school policy. By order of the principal, codified in the school’s teacher handbook, all teachers should grade their classes in the same way: 30 percent of students should earn a grade in the A range, 40 percent B’s, 25 percent C’s, and no more than 5 percent D’s. As long as they show up, they should not fail. Hey, that sounds like Harvard and Columbia^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H various selective northeastern colleges I’ve known. Of course, we^H^H

same-blog 6 0.92644423 1532 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-13-A real-life dollar auction game!

7 0.91644967 1332 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-20-Problemen met het boek

8 0.91354036 1664 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-10-Recently in the sister blog: Brussels sprouts, ugly graphs, and switched at birth

9 0.91200805 1424 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-22-Extreme events as evidence for differences in distributions

10 0.86664927 1961 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-29-Postdocs in probabilistic modeling! With David Blei! And Stan!

11 0.86100185 389 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-01-Why it can be rational to vote

12 0.8610009 1565 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-06-Why it can be rational to vote

13 0.84937626 560 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-06-Education and Poverty

14 0.84662449 29 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-12-Probability of successive wins in baseball

15 0.84623176 1142 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-29-Difficulties with the 1-4-power transformation

16 0.84393537 1110 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-10-Jobs in statistics research! In New Jersey!

17 0.84228319 1566 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-07-A question about voting systems—unrelated to U.S. elections!

18 0.8338753 1226 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-22-Story time meets the all-else-equal fallacy and the fallacy of measurement

19 0.81164694 1715 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-09-Thomas Hobbes would be spinning in his grave

20 0.80755198 640 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-31-Why Edit Wikipedia?