andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1537 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Behavioral and Brain Sciences
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('behavioral', 0.65), ('brain', 0.585), ('sciences', 0.485)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 1537 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-17-100!
Introduction: Behavioral and Brain Sciences
2 0.33579183 557 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-05-Call for book proposals
Introduction: Rob Calver writes: Large and complex datasets are becoming prevalent in the social and behavioral sciences and statistical methods are crucial for the analysis and interpretation of such data. The Chapman & Hall/CRC Statistics in the Social and Behavioral Sciences Series aims to capture new developments in statistical methodology with particular relevance to applications in the social and behavioral sciences. It seeks to promote appropriate use of statistical, econometric and psychometric methods in these applied sciences by publishing a broad range of monographs, textbooks and handbooks. The scope of the series is wide, including applications of statistical methodology in sociology, psychology, economics, education, marketing research, political science, criminology, public policy, demography, survey methodology and official statistics. The titles included in the series are designed to appeal to applied statisticians, as well as students, researchers and practitioners from the
3 0.24957985 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 0.167118 1298 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-03-News from the sister blog!
Introduction: US National Academy of Sciences elects 84 new members (Please click through and read the whole thing.)
5 0.14828563 2292 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-15-When you believe in things that you don’t understand
Introduction: This would make Karl Popper cry. And, at the very end: The present results indicate that under certain, theoretically predictable circumstances, female ovulation—long assumed to be hidden—is in fact associated with a distinct, objectively observable behavioral display. This statement is correct—if you interpret the word “predictable” to mean “predictable after looking at your data.” P.S. I’d like to say that April 15 is a good day for this posting because your tax dollars went toward supporting this research. But actually it was supported by the Social Sciences Research Council of Canada, and I assume they do their taxes on their own schedule. P.P.S. In preemptive response to people who think I’m being mean by picking on these researchers, let me just say: Nobody forced them to publish these articles. If you put your ideas out there, you have to be ready for criticism.
6 0.14448921 490 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-29-Brain Structure and the Big Five
8 0.1328717 53 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-26-Tumors, on the left, or on the right?
9 0.13008773 2028 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-17-Online conference for young statistics researchers
10 0.11518255 2004 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-01-Post-publication peer review: How it (sometimes) really works
11 0.10860517 1857 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-15-Does quantum uncertainty have a place in everyday applied statistics?
12 0.107486 1335 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-21-Responding to a bizarre anti-social-science screed
13 0.10664751 1336 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-22-Battle of the Repo Man quotes: Reid Hastie’s turn
14 0.09877906 185 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-04-Why does anyone support private macroeconomic forecasts?
15 0.093093619 594 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-28-Behavioral economics doesn’t seem to have much to say about marriage
16 0.08462128 2069 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-19-R package for effect size calculations for psychology researchers
17 0.08162903 10 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-29-Alternatives to regression for social science predictions
18 0.079664811 994 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-06-Josh Tenenbaum presents . . . a model of folk physics!
19 0.078086264 2356 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-02-On deck this week
20 0.077060804 2115 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-27-Three unblinded mice
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.017), (1, -0.006), (2, -0.015), (3, -0.022), (4, -0.01), (5, 0.01), (6, -0.033), (7, -0.01), (8, -0.003), (9, 0.028), (10, -0.008), (11, -0.022), (12, 0.014), (13, -0.017), (14, -0.019), (15, 0.008), (16, 0.021), (17, -0.011), (18, 0.007), (19, -0.013), (20, -0.006), (21, -0.018), (22, -0.013), (23, 0.018), (24, 0.005), (25, 0.019), (26, 0.006), (27, -0.016), (28, -0.011), (29, -0.039), (30, -0.025), (31, -0.014), (32, 0.019), (33, -0.048), (34, -0.009), (35, -0.016), (36, 0.01), (37, 0.008), (38, 0.018), (39, 0.013), (40, 0.019), (41, 0.027), (42, 0.046), (43, 0.011), (44, -0.012), (45, -0.018), (46, 0.044), (47, 0.011), (48, -0.017), (49, -0.021)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99877483 1537 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-17-100!
Introduction: Behavioral and Brain Sciences
2 0.5817067 1051 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-10-Towards a Theory of Trust in Networks of Humans and Computers
Introduction: Hey, this looks cool: Towards a Theory of Trust in Networks of Humans and Computers Virgil Gligor Carnegie Mellon University We argue that a general theory of trust in networks of humans and computers must be build on both a theory of behavioral trust and a theory of computational trust. This argument is motivated by increased participation of people in social networking, crowdsourcing, human computation, and socio-economic protocols, e.g., protocols modeled by trust and gift-exchange games, norms-establishing contracts, and scams/deception. User participation in these protocols relies primarily on trust, since on-line verification of protocol compliance is often impractical; e.g., verification can lead to undecidable problems, co-NP complete test procedures, and user inconvenience. Trust is captured by participant preferences (i.e., risk and betrayal aversion) and beliefs in the trustworthiness of other protocol participants. Both preferences and beliefs can be enhanced
3 0.56541061 1932 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-10-Don’t trust the Turk
Introduction: Dan Kahan gives a bunch of reasons not to trust Mechanical Turk in psychology experiments, in particular when studying “hypotheses about cognition and political conflict over societal risks and other policy-relevant facts.”
4 0.53993285 978 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-28-Cool job opening with brilliant researchers at Yahoo
Introduction: Duncan Watts writes: The Human Social Dynamics Group in Yahoo Research is seeking highly qualified candidates for a post-doctoral research scientist position. The Human and Social Dynamics group is devoted to understanding the interplay between individual-level behavior (e.g. how people make decisions about what music they like, which dates to go on, or which groups to join) and the social environment in which individual behavior necessarily plays itself out. In particular, we are interested in: * Structure and evolution of social groups and networks * Decision making, social influence, diffusion, and collective decisions * Networking and collaborative problem solving. The intrinsically multi-disciplinary and cross-cutting nature of the subject demands an eclectic range of researchers, both in terms of domain-expertise (e.g. decision sciences, social psychology, sociology) and technical skills (e.g. statistical analysis, mathematical modeling, computer simulations, design o
5 0.51854897 1630 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-18-Postdoc positions at Microsoft Research – NYC
Introduction: Sharad Goel sends this in: Microsoft Research NYC [ http://research.microsoft.com/newyork/ ] seeks outstanding applicants for 2-year postdoctoral researcher positions. We welcome applicants with a strong academic record in one of the following areas: * Computational social science: http://research.microsoft.com/cssnyc * Online experimental social science: http://research.microsoft.com/oess_nyc * Algorithmic economics and market design: http://research.microsoft.com/algorithmic-economics/ * Machine learning: http://research.microsoft.com/mlnyc/ We will also consider applicants in other focus areas of the lab, including information retrieval, and behavioral & empirical economics. Additional information about these areas is included below. Please submit all application materials by January 11, 2013. ———- COMPUTATIONAL SOCIAL SCIENCE http://research.microsoft.com/cssnyc With an increasing amount of data on every aspect of our daily activities — from what we buy, to wh
6 0.5157432 557 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-05-Call for book proposals
7 0.50409967 202 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-12-Job openings in multilevel modeling in Bristol, England
8 0.4871318 1828 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-27-Time-Sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences
10 0.47796088 994 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-06-Josh Tenenbaum presents . . . a model of folk physics!
11 0.47717568 1335 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-21-Responding to a bizarre anti-social-science screed
12 0.4730351 756 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-10-Christakis-Fowler update
14 0.46907368 1652 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-03-“The Case for Inductive Theory Building”
16 0.44919413 1802 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-14-Detecting predictability in complex ecosystems
17 0.44745958 1754 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-08-Cool GSS training video! And cumulative file 1972-2012!
18 0.4394843 877 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-29-Applying quantum probability to political science
topicId topicWeight
[(91, 0.636)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 1537 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-17-100!
Introduction: Behavioral and Brain Sciences
2 0.8211292 1106 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-08-Intro to splines—with cool graphs
Introduction: Ido Rosen pointed me to this page by Mike Kamermans.
3 0.74103421 476 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-19-Google’s word count statistics viewer
Introduction: Word count stats from the Google books database prove that Bayesianism is expanding faster than the universe. A n-gram is a tuple of n words.
4 0.42903662 2138 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-18-In Memoriam Dennis Lindley
Introduction: So. Farewell then Dennis Lindley. You held the Hard line on Bayesianism When others Had doubts. And you share The name of a famous Paradox. What is your subjective Prior now? We can only Infer. R. A. Thribb (17 1/2) P.S.
5 0.35218963 637 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-29-Unfinished business
Introduction: This blog by J. Robert Lennon on abandoned novels made me think of the more general topic of abandoned projects. I seem to recall George V. Higgins writing that he’d written and discarded 14 novels or so before publishing The Friends of Eddie Coyle. I haven’t abandoned any novels but I’ve abandoned lots of research projects (and also have started various projects that there’s no way I’ll finish). If you think about the decisions involved, it really has to be that way. You learn while you’re working on a project whether it’s worth continuing. Sometimes I’ve put in the hard work and pushed a project to completion, published the article, and then I think . . . what was the point? The modal number of citations of our articles is zero, etc.
6 0.32876503 1186 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-27-Confusion from illusory precision
7 0.2989288 920 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-22-Top 10 blog obsessions
8 0.29302171 1528 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-10-My talk at MIT on Thurs 11 Oct
9 0.278622 686 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-29-What are the open problems in Bayesian statistics??
10 0.25290012 2101 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-15-BDA class 4 G+ hangout on air is on air
11 0.22619304 53 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-26-Tumors, on the left, or on the right?
12 0.18688922 1753 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-06-Stan 1.2.0 and RStan 1.2.0
13 0.18540849 736 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-29-Response to “Why Tables Are Really Much Better Than Graphs”
15 0.14009187 2209 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-13-CmdStan, RStan, PyStan v2.2.0
16 0.12756464 1689 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-23-MLB Hall of Fame Voting Trajectories
17 0.099656127 1475 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-30-A Stan is Born
18 0.096614815 1365 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-04-Question 25 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
19 0.096299969 48 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-23-The bane of many causes
20 0.090162881 1852 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-12-Crime novels for economists