andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2013 andrew_gelman_stats-2013-1694 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: I have to say, it distorts my internal incentives when I am happy to see really blatant examples of ethical lapses. Sort of like when you’re cleaning the attic and searching for roaches: on one hand, you’d be happy if there were none, but, still, there’s a thrill each time you find a roach and catch it—and, at that point, you want it to be a big ugly one!
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 I have to say, it distorts my internal incentives when I am happy to see really blatant examples of ethical lapses. [sent-1, score-1.668]
2 Sort of like when you’re cleaning the attic and searching for roaches: on one hand, you’d be happy if there were none, but, still, there’s a thrill each time you find a roach and catch it—and, at that point, you want it to be a big ugly one! [sent-2, score-2.342]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('blatant', 0.32), ('attic', 0.32), ('roach', 0.32), ('roaches', 0.302), ('distorts', 0.289), ('thrill', 0.264), ('happy', 0.258), ('cleaning', 0.229), ('internal', 0.214), ('searching', 0.199), ('ethical', 0.196), ('ugly', 0.191), ('incentives', 0.185), ('catch', 0.182), ('none', 0.156), ('hand', 0.113), ('examples', 0.11), ('big', 0.085), ('find', 0.078), ('still', 0.073), ('sort', 0.073), ('want', 0.066), ('one', 0.063), ('say', 0.061), ('point', 0.058), ('re', 0.057), ('really', 0.054), ('time', 0.052), ('see', 0.042), ('like', 0.035)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0000001 1694 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-26-Reflections on ethicsblogging
Introduction: I have to say, it distorts my internal incentives when I am happy to see really blatant examples of ethical lapses. Sort of like when you’re cleaning the attic and searching for roaches: on one hand, you’d be happy if there were none, but, still, there’s a thrill each time you find a roach and catch it—and, at that point, you want it to be a big ugly one!
2 0.1600785 424 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-21-Data cleaning tool!
Introduction: Hal Varian writes: You might find this a useful tool for cleaning data. I haven’t tried it out yet, but data cleaning is a hugely important topic and so this could be a big deal.
3 0.14432342 1093 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-30-Strings Attached: Untangling the Ethics of Incentives
Introduction: Chris Paulse points me to this book by Ruth Grant: Incentives can be found everywhere–in schools, businesses, factories, and government–influencing people’s choices about almost everything, from financial decisions and tobacco use to exercise and child rearing. So long as people have a choice, incentives seem innocuous. But Strings Attached demonstrates that when incentives are viewed as a kind of power rather than as a form of exchange, many ethical questions arise: How do incentives affect character and institutional culture? Can incentives be manipulative or exploitative, even if people are free to refuse them? What are the responsibilities of the powerful in using incentives? Ruth Grant shows that, like all other forms of power, incentives can be subject to abuse, and she identifies their legitimate and illegitimate uses. Grant offers a history of the growth of incentives in early twentieth-century America, identifies standards for judging incentives, and examines incentives
4 0.10763142 2053 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-06-Ideas that spread fast and slow
Introduction: Atul Gawande (the thinking man’s Malcolm Gladwell) asks : Why do some innovations spread so swiftly and others so slowly? Consider the very different trajectories of surgical anesthesia and antiseptics, both of which were discovered in the nineteenth century. The first public demonstration of anesthesia was in 1846. The Boston surgeon Henry Jacob Bigelow was approached by a local dentist named William Morton, who insisted that he had found a gas that could render patients insensible to the pain of surgery. That was a dramatic claim. In those days, even a minor tooth extraction was excruciating. Without effective pain control, surgeons learned to work with slashing speed. Attendants pinned patients down as they screamed and thrashed, until they fainted from the agony. Nothing ever tried had made much difference. Nonetheless, Bigelow agreed to let Morton demonstrate his claim. On October 16, 1846, at Massachusetts General Hospital, Morton administered his gas through an inhaler in
5 0.096988089 817 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-23-New blog home
Introduction: Hi all. We’ve moved the blog and are still working out some bugs. For example, we delete spam comments but sometimes they remain on the blog. A few other things. We should be cleaning it up more in the next few days.
6 0.080097958 126 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-03-Graphical presentation of risk ratios
7 0.063478291 306 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-29-Statistics and the end of time
10 0.053433321 1028 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-26-Tenure lets you handle students who cheat
11 0.05220522 1464 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-20-Donald E. Westlake on George W. Bush
12 0.051261872 856 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-16-Our new improved blog! Thanks to Cord Blomquist
13 0.050582003 1553 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-30-Real rothko, fake rothko
14 0.050426748 1727 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-19-Beef with data
15 0.049813513 1232 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-27-Banned in NYC school tests
16 0.04718319 221 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-21-Busted!
17 0.045351233 1726 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-18-What to read to catch up on multivariate statistics?
18 0.045139942 1018 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-19-Tempering and modes
19 0.043703731 2025 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-15-The it-gets-me-so-angry-I-can’t-deal-with-it threshold
20 0.043556768 1447 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-07-Reproducible science FAIL (so far): What’s stoppin people from sharin data and code?
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.069), (1, -0.024), (2, -0.015), (3, 0.016), (4, 0.015), (5, -0.016), (6, 0.02), (7, -0.004), (8, 0.014), (9, 0.003), (10, -0.023), (11, -0.013), (12, 0.006), (13, -0.016), (14, 0.013), (15, 0.008), (16, 0.002), (17, -0.003), (18, -0.001), (19, 0.009), (20, -0.019), (21, -0.014), (22, -0.013), (23, 0.01), (24, -0.011), (25, 0.002), (26, 0.01), (27, -0.005), (28, 0.002), (29, 0.015), (30, -0.013), (31, 0.018), (32, 0.012), (33, -0.024), (34, -0.014), (35, 0.014), (36, 0.003), (37, -0.01), (38, -0.02), (39, 0.014), (40, 0.017), (41, 0.019), (42, -0.003), (43, 0.026), (44, 0.008), (45, 0.004), (46, 0.023), (47, -0.01), (48, 0.035), (49, -0.006)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.91189504 1694 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-26-Reflections on ethicsblogging
Introduction: I have to say, it distorts my internal incentives when I am happy to see really blatant examples of ethical lapses. Sort of like when you’re cleaning the attic and searching for roaches: on one hand, you’d be happy if there were none, but, still, there’s a thrill each time you find a roach and catch it—and, at that point, you want it to be a big ugly one!
Introduction: Jed Dougherty points me to this opinion piece by Jacqueline Stevens, a professor of art at Northwestern University, who writes: Artists are defensive these days because in May the House passed an amendment to a bill eliminating the National Endowment for the Arts. Colleagues, especially those who have received N.E.A. grants, will loathe me for saying this, but just this once I’m sympathetic with the anti-intellectual Republicans behind this amendment. Why? The bill incited a national conversation about a subject that has troubled me for decades: the government — disproportionately — supports art that I do not like. Actually, just about nobody likes modern art. All those soup cans—what’s that all about? The stuff they have in museums nowadays, my 4-year-old could do better than that. Two-thirds of so-called modern artists are drunk and two-thirds are frauds. And, no, I didn’t get my math wrong—there’s just a lot of overlap among these categories! It’s an open secret in my
3 0.72672057 1190 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-29-Why “Why”?
Introduction: In old books (and occasionally new books), you see the word “Why” used to indicate a pause or emphasis in dialogue. For example, from 1952: “Why, how perfectly simple!” she said to herself. “The way to save Wilbur’s life is to play a trick on Zuckerman. “If I can fool a bug,” thought Charlotte, “I can surely fool a man. People are not as smart as bugs.” That line about people and bugs was cute, but what really jumped out at me was the “Why.” I don’t think I’ve ever ever heard anyone use “Why” in that way in conversation, but I see it all the time in books, and every time it’s jarring. What’s the deal? Is it that people used to talk that way? Or is a Wasp thing, some regional speech pattern that was captured in books because it was considered standard conversational speech? I suppose one way to learn more would be to watch a bunch of old movies. I could sort of imagine Jimmy Stewart beginning his sentences with “Why” all the time. Does anyone know more? P.S. I use
4 0.71993905 1553 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-30-Real rothko, fake rothko
Introduction: Jay Livingston writes : I know that in art, quality and value are two very different things. Still, I had to stop and wonder when I read about Domenico and Eleanore De Sole, who in 2004 paid $8.3 million for a painting attributed to Mark Rothko that they now say is a worthless fake. One day a painting is worth $8.3 million; the next day, the same painting – same quality, same capacity to give aesthetic pleasure or do whatever it is that art does – is “worthless.”* Art forgery also makes me wonder about the buyer’s motive. If the buyer wanted only to have and to gaze upon something beautiful, something with artistic merit, then a fake Rothko is no different than a real Rothko. It seems more likely that what the buyer wants is to own something valuable – i.e., something that costs a lot. Displaying your brokerage account statements is just too crude and obvious. What the high-end art market offers is a kind of money laundering. Objects that are rare and therefore expensive
5 0.71448153 2197 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-04-Peabody here.
Introduction: I saw the trailer for the new Mr. Peabody movie and it looked terrible. They used that weird animation where everything looks round, also the voice had none of the intonations of the “real” Peabody (for some reason, the trailer had the original English voices, maybe they didn’t get their act together to make a dubbed trailer in time for the release here), also the scenes looked pretty stupid. I went back home and checked out Peabody on wikipedia and it turns out that they made 91 episodes! I had no idea. Anyway, here’s my real question: Why bother making a Mr. Peabody movie if you’re not going to do it well? I understand that lots of moviemakers are hacks and there will always be a huge audience for crap in any case, so I’m certainly not demanding that all movies be “good” (in whatever sense that means, from my perceptions). But there are lots and lots of opportunities to make crap movies, there are a million toys and video games and comic book characters and fairy tales and br
6 0.70836514 620 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-19-Online James?
7 0.7079432 1759 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-12-How tall is Jon Lee Anderson?
8 0.69141835 1808 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-17-Excel-bashing
9 0.69053292 1369 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-06-Your conclusion is only as good as your data
10 0.68852818 2053 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-06-Ideas that spread fast and slow
11 0.6858418 416 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-16-Is parenting a form of addiction?
12 0.68417698 424 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-21-Data cleaning tool!
13 0.68406749 926 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-26-NYC
14 0.68302947 111 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-26-Tough love as a style of writing
15 0.68217367 1003 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-11-$
16 0.68165672 1785 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-02-So much artistic talent
17 0.6811257 910 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-15-Google Refine
18 0.67954659 191 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-08-Angry about the soda tax
19 0.67934173 1887 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-07-“Happy Money: The Science of Smarter Spending”
20 0.67908037 741 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-02-At least he didn’t prove a false theorem
topicId topicWeight
[(13, 0.08), (16, 0.146), (21, 0.034), (24, 0.022), (57, 0.037), (97, 0.357), (99, 0.159)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.85962147 1573 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-11-Incredibly strange spam
Introduction: Unsolicited (of course) in the email the other day: Just wanted to touch base with you to see if you needed any quotes on Parking lot lighting or Garage Lighting? (Induction, LED, Canopy etc…) We help retrofit 1000′s of garages around the country. Let me know your specs and ill send you a quote in 24 hours. ** Owner Emergency Lights Co. Ill indeed. . . .
2 0.77423656 882 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-31-Meanwhile, on the sister blog . . .
Introduction: NYT columnist Douthat asks: Should we be disturbed that a leading presidential candidate endorses a pro-slavery position? Who’s on the web? And where are they? Sowell, Carlson, Barone: fools, knaves, or simply victims of a cognitive illusion? Don’t blame the American public for the D.C. deadlock Calvin College update Help reform the Institutional Review Board (IRB) system! Powerful credit-rating agencies are a creation of the government . . . what does it mean when they bite the hand that feeds them? “Waiting for a landslide” A simple theory of why Obama didn’t come out fighting in 2009 A modest proposal Noooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Family Research Council and the Barnard Center for Research on Women Sleazy data miners Genetic essentialism is in our genes Wow, that was a lot! No wonder I don’t get any research done…
same-blog 3 0.729087 1694 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-26-Reflections on ethicsblogging
Introduction: I have to say, it distorts my internal incentives when I am happy to see really blatant examples of ethical lapses. Sort of like when you’re cleaning the attic and searching for roaches: on one hand, you’d be happy if there were none, but, still, there’s a thrill each time you find a roach and catch it—and, at that point, you want it to be a big ugly one!
Introduction: David Ebert sends this along: Purdue University School of ECE Faculty Position in Human-Centered Computing The School of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Purdue University invites applications for a faculty position at any level in human-centered computing, including but not limited to visualization, visual analytics, human-computer interaction (HCI), imaging, and graphics. . . . Applications should consist of a cover letter, a CV, research and teaching statements, names and contact information for at least three references, and URLs for three to five online papers. . . . We will consider applications through March 2013. It’s great to see this sort of thing. P.S. Amusingly enough, the Purdue Visualization and Analytics Center has an ugly, bureaucratic, text-heavy webpage . Not that I’m one to talk, the Columbia stat dept has an ugly webpage too (although I think we’ll be switching soon to something better).
5 0.68514419 1001 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-10-Three hours in the life of a statistician
Introduction: Kaiser Fung tells what it’s really like . Here’s a sample: As soon as I [Kaiser] put the substring-concatenate expression together with two lines of code that generate data tables, it choked. Sorta like Dashiell Hammett without the broads and the heaters. And here’s another take, from a slightly different perspective.
6 0.6109255 996 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-07-Chi-square FAIL when many cells have small expected values
7 0.61048454 160 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-23-Unhappy with improvement by a factor of 10^29
10 0.55215752 13 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-30-Things I learned from the Mickey Kaus for Senate campaign
11 0.5450412 820 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-25-Design of nonrandomized cluster sample study
13 0.53077537 1812 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-19-Chomsky chomsky chomsky chomsky furiously
14 0.53048664 526 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-19-“If it saves the life of a single child…” and other nonsense
15 0.52611399 1335 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-21-Responding to a bizarre anti-social-science screed
16 0.52324259 112 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-27-Sampling rate of human-scaled time series
17 0.51320517 1330 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-19-Cross-validation to check missing-data imputation
18 0.50608325 1025 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-24-Always check your evidence
19 0.50471127 1598 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-30-A graphics talk with no visuals!
20 0.50393313 321 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-05-Racism!