andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2013 andrew_gelman_stats-2013-1819 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Following up on our blog discussions a year ago, I published a review of Charles Murray’s recent book, “Coming Apart,” for the journal Statistics, Politics, and Policy. I invited Murray to publish a response, and he did so. Here’s the abstract to my review : This article examines some claims made in a recent popular book of political sociology, with the intent not being to debunk any claims but rather to connect some important social and policy positions to statistical data on income, social class, and political attitudes. The thesis of Charles Murray’s book is that America’s upper and lower classes have become increasingly separate, with elites living more disciplined, orderly lives (characterized by marriage, work, and stable families) while being largely unaware of the lifestyles of the majority of Americans. I argue that some of Murray’s conclusions are sensitive to particular choices of whom to label as elite or upper-class. From my analysis of survey data, I see the big
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 The thesis of Charles Murray’s book is that America’s upper and lower classes have become increasingly separate, with elites living more disciplined, orderly lives (characterized by marriage, work, and stable families) while being largely unaware of the lifestyles of the majority of Americans. [sent-4, score-0.217]
2 From my analysis of survey data, I see the big culture war occurring within the upper class, whereas Murray focuses on differences in attitudes and lifestyles comparing rich to poor. [sent-6, score-0.284]
3 Near the end of his reply to my review, Murray writes: When a society’s elite is confident that its own values are the ones that all of society ought to adopt, those values get communicated. [sent-11, score-0.248]
4 They are reflected in the way that members of the elite talk with their children, with their professional colleagues, and whenever those topics relating to their values come up in a public setting. [sent-13, score-0.194]
5 In all of those settings, today’s new upper class tends to be obsessively nonjudgmental. [sent-14, score-0.312]
6 Fifty years ago, no one at the same kind of dinner party would have said that it was not morally wrong. [sent-16, score-0.59]
7 It is statistically highly likely that all of the biological children of the people at a dinner table of today’s upper-class adults have been born within wedlock. [sent-17, score-0.379]
8 If there are childless never-married women at the table, it is likely that they have deliberately foregone having a baby, even though they might want one, because they have decided it is unfair to the child not to have a father. [sent-18, score-0.135]
9 Put another way, it is likely that all of the people at the table have made moral evaluations and behaved accordingly. [sent-19, score-0.236]
10 “Preach what you practice” simply means to stop being nonjudgmental in public about moral principles that you hold in private. [sent-20, score-0.253]
11 I actually know several women who’ve knowingly brought fatherless babies into the world—and they and their kids seem to be doing just fine. [sent-23, score-0.272]
12 Yes, I realize there are people who find this sort of thing objectionable, but I’d actually think it was kind of rude for them to say something like that over dinner—at least, it would be rude if one of our friends with children were around. [sent-24, score-0.418]
13 In the last two sentences of the quotation above, Murray implies that members of the upper class hold in private the principle that it is morally wrong for a woman to bring a baby into the world knowing that it will not have a father. [sent-26, score-1.594]
14 That might be true among the upper class of Dallas or other conservative parts of the country, but where I live, not so much. [sent-27, score-0.219]
15 And I could respond with some poll data showing liberal attitudes on social issues among Americans under 40. [sent-29, score-0.165]
16 Murray thinks it’s obsessionally nonjudgmental to think it’s OK for a woman to have a baby with no father, and I think it’s an odd sort of retro throwback to believe that such a woman’s behavior is morally wrong. [sent-31, score-1.051]
17 (Murray might, for example, agree that my friends might be OK having brought babies into the world knowing they will not have a father. [sent-33, score-0.63]
18 Perhaps he could consider it morally wrong in general but accept my friends as special cases, perhaps arguing that this sort of think can work in Morningside Heights but not in many other places in the country. [sent-34, score-0.659]
19 ” I agree that my friends wouldn’t be “willing to say” this, but for the simple reason that I think most of my friends don’t think it is wrong for a woman to do that. [sent-39, score-0.858]
20 Then again, lots of Americans would agree with Murray on the moral condemnation. [sent-41, score-0.131]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('murray', 0.551), ('morally', 0.329), ('woman', 0.258), ('dinner', 0.196), ('baby', 0.173), ('friends', 0.16), ('knowing', 0.15), ('upper', 0.133), ('father', 0.133), ('nonjudgmental', 0.131), ('babies', 0.123), ('wrong', 0.115), ('companions', 0.102), ('obsessively', 0.093), ('women', 0.091), ('bring', 0.089), ('elite', 0.087), ('class', 0.086), ('world', 0.084), ('lifestyles', 0.084), ('private', 0.082), ('moral', 0.076), ('gathering', 0.073), ('table', 0.07), ('children', 0.069), ('willing', 0.069), ('rude', 0.067), ('attitudes', 0.067), ('party', 0.065), ('bringing', 0.061), ('charles', 0.058), ('brought', 0.058), ('values', 0.058), ('think', 0.055), ('apart', 0.055), ('agree', 0.055), ('social', 0.053), ('review', 0.052), ('thinks', 0.05), ('members', 0.049), ('ok', 0.047), ('screenwriters', 0.046), ('behaved', 0.046), ('dallas', 0.046), ('editorials', 0.046), ('hold', 0.046), ('respond', 0.045), ('society', 0.045), ('likely', 0.044), ('abstract', 0.044)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999964 1819 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-23-Charles Murray’s “Coming Apart” and the measurement of social and political divisions
Introduction: Following up on our blog discussions a year ago, I published a review of Charles Murray’s recent book, “Coming Apart,” for the journal Statistics, Politics, and Policy. I invited Murray to publish a response, and he did so. Here’s the abstract to my review : This article examines some claims made in a recent popular book of political sociology, with the intent not being to debunk any claims but rather to connect some important social and policy positions to statistical data on income, social class, and political attitudes. The thesis of Charles Murray’s book is that America’s upper and lower classes have become increasingly separate, with elites living more disciplined, orderly lives (characterized by marriage, work, and stable families) while being largely unaware of the lifestyles of the majority of Americans. I argue that some of Murray’s conclusions are sensitive to particular choices of whom to label as elite or upper-class. From my analysis of survey data, I see the big
2 0.53670925 1169 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-15-Charles Murray on the new upper class
Introduction: The other day I posted some comments on the voting patterns of rich and poor in the context of Charles Murray’s recent book, “Coming Apart.” My graphs on income and voting are just fine, but I mischaracterized Murray’s statements. So I want to fix that right away. After that I have some thoughts on the book itself. In brief: 1. I was unfair to call him a Tucker Carlson. 2. Murray talks a lot about upper-class liberals. That’s fine but I think his discussion would be improved by also considering upper-class conservatives, given that I see the big culture war occurring within the upper class. 3. Using the case of Joe Paterno as an example, I discuss why Murray’s “preach what you practice” advice could be difficult to carry out in practice. Murray on the top 5% David Frum quoted Murray as writing that the top 5% “tends to be liberal—right? There’s no getting around it. Every way of answering this question produces a yes.” In response, Frum and I both pointed out t
3 0.44409424 1836 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-02-Culture clash
Introduction: I had no idea this sort of thing even existed: I’m reminded of our discussion of Charles Murray’s recent book on social divisions among Americans. Murray talked about differences between upper and lower class, but I thought he was really talking more about differences between liberals and conservatives among the elite. (More discussion here .) In this particular case, Murray’s story about irresponsible elites seems to fit pretty well. At the elite level, you have well-connected D.C. gun lobbyists opposing any restrictions on personal weapons. As Murray might put it, the elites (Phil Spector aside) may be able to handle their guns, but some lower-class Americans cannot—they do things like give real rifles to 5-year-olds (!). As Murray writes, it’s a combination of cultural ignorance and a permissive ideology: I assume the senators who voted against the recent gun control bill wouldn’t give live weapons to their kids (or live in neighborhoods in which kids have acces
Introduction: Charles Murray wrote a much-discussed new book, “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” David Frum quotes Murray as writing, in an echo of now-forgotten TV personality Tucker Carlson , that the top 5% of incomes “tends to be liberal—right? There’s no getting around it. Every way of answering this question produces a yes.” [I’ve interjected a “perhaps” into the title of this blog post to indicate that I don’t have the exact Murray quote here so I’m relying on David Frum’s interpretation.] Frum does me the favor of citing Red State Blue State as evidence, and I’d like to back this up with some graphs. Frum writes: Say “top 5%” to Murray, and his imagination conjures up everything he dislikes: coastal liberals listening to NPR in their Lexus hybrid SUVs. He sees that image so intensely that no mere number can force him to remember that the top 5% also includes the evangelical Christian assistant coach of a state university football team. . . . To put it i
5 0.17859921 1325 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-17-More on the difficulty of “preaching what you practice”
Introduction: A couple months ago, in discussing Charles Murray’s argument that America’s social leaders should “preach what they practice” (Murray argues that they—we!—tend to lead good lives of hard work and moderation but are all too tolerant of antisocial and unproductive behavior among the lower classes), I wrote : Murray does not consider the case of Joe Paterno, but in many ways the Penn State football coach fits his story well. Paterno was said to live an exemplary personal and professional life, combining traditional morality with football success—but, by his actions, he showed little concern about the morality of his players and coaches. At a professional level, Paterno rose higher and higher, and in his personal life he was a responsible adult. But he had an increasing disconnect with the real world, to the extent that horrible crimes were occurring nearby (in the physical and social senses) but he was completely insulated from the consequences for many years. Paterno’s story is s
8 0.11473349 8 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-28-Advice to help the rich get richer
9 0.11167309 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote
10 0.10634679 1912 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-24-Bayesian quality control?
11 0.10505104 2015 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-10-The ethics of lying, cheating, and stealing with data: A case study
12 0.095343143 1 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-22-Political Belief Networks: Socio-cognitive Heterogeneity in American Public Opinion
13 0.094480745 2223 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-24-“Edlin’s rule” for routinely scaling down published estimates
15 0.089793801 995 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-06-Statistical models and actual models
16 0.088099547 2333 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-13-Personally, I’d rather go with Teragram
17 0.08589673 1249 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-06-Thinking seriously about social science research
18 0.085746571 719 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-19-Everything is Obvious (once you know the answer)
19 0.084529743 1860 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-17-How can statisticians help psychologists do their research better?
20 0.082010716 2280 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-03-As the boldest experiment in journalism history, you admit you made a mistake
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.176), (1, -0.085), (2, 0.054), (3, 0.025), (4, -0.046), (5, 0.005), (6, -0.006), (7, 0.022), (8, 0.02), (9, 0.027), (10, -0.025), (11, 0.016), (12, -0.05), (13, 0.051), (14, 0.108), (15, -0.005), (16, 0.015), (17, -0.025), (18, 0.037), (19, -0.058), (20, 0.016), (21, -0.08), (22, -0.04), (23, -0.063), (24, 0.027), (25, -0.011), (26, -0.006), (27, 0.006), (28, 0.032), (29, -0.067), (30, -0.003), (31, -0.032), (32, -0.032), (33, 0.042), (34, 0.023), (35, -0.035), (36, -0.009), (37, -0.015), (38, -0.012), (39, 0.051), (40, 0.004), (41, -0.003), (42, -0.064), (43, -0.036), (44, -0.055), (45, 0.054), (46, -0.003), (47, -0.002), (48, -0.003), (49, 0.043)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.95795631 1836 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-02-Culture clash
Introduction: I had no idea this sort of thing even existed: I’m reminded of our discussion of Charles Murray’s recent book on social divisions among Americans. Murray talked about differences between upper and lower class, but I thought he was really talking more about differences between liberals and conservatives among the elite. (More discussion here .) In this particular case, Murray’s story about irresponsible elites seems to fit pretty well. At the elite level, you have well-connected D.C. gun lobbyists opposing any restrictions on personal weapons. As Murray might put it, the elites (Phil Spector aside) may be able to handle their guns, but some lower-class Americans cannot—they do things like give real rifles to 5-year-olds (!). As Murray writes, it’s a combination of cultural ignorance and a permissive ideology: I assume the senators who voted against the recent gun control bill wouldn’t give live weapons to their kids (or live in neighborhoods in which kids have acces
2 0.94289732 1169 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-15-Charles Murray on the new upper class
Introduction: The other day I posted some comments on the voting patterns of rich and poor in the context of Charles Murray’s recent book, “Coming Apart.” My graphs on income and voting are just fine, but I mischaracterized Murray’s statements. So I want to fix that right away. After that I have some thoughts on the book itself. In brief: 1. I was unfair to call him a Tucker Carlson. 2. Murray talks a lot about upper-class liberals. That’s fine but I think his discussion would be improved by also considering upper-class conservatives, given that I see the big culture war occurring within the upper class. 3. Using the case of Joe Paterno as an example, I discuss why Murray’s “preach what you practice” advice could be difficult to carry out in practice. Murray on the top 5% David Frum quoted Murray as writing that the top 5% “tends to be liberal—right? There’s no getting around it. Every way of answering this question produces a yes.” In response, Frum and I both pointed out t
same-blog 3 0.92349899 1819 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-23-Charles Murray’s “Coming Apart” and the measurement of social and political divisions
Introduction: Following up on our blog discussions a year ago, I published a review of Charles Murray’s recent book, “Coming Apart,” for the journal Statistics, Politics, and Policy. I invited Murray to publish a response, and he did so. Here’s the abstract to my review : This article examines some claims made in a recent popular book of political sociology, with the intent not being to debunk any claims but rather to connect some important social and policy positions to statistical data on income, social class, and political attitudes. The thesis of Charles Murray’s book is that America’s upper and lower classes have become increasingly separate, with elites living more disciplined, orderly lives (characterized by marriage, work, and stable families) while being largely unaware of the lifestyles of the majority of Americans. I argue that some of Murray’s conclusions are sensitive to particular choices of whom to label as elite or upper-class. From my analysis of survey data, I see the big
4 0.83881074 1325 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-17-More on the difficulty of “preaching what you practice”
Introduction: A couple months ago, in discussing Charles Murray’s argument that America’s social leaders should “preach what they practice” (Murray argues that they—we!—tend to lead good lives of hard work and moderation but are all too tolerant of antisocial and unproductive behavior among the lower classes), I wrote : Murray does not consider the case of Joe Paterno, but in many ways the Penn State football coach fits his story well. Paterno was said to live an exemplary personal and professional life, combining traditional morality with football success—but, by his actions, he showed little concern about the morality of his players and coaches. At a professional level, Paterno rose higher and higher, and in his personal life he was a responsible adult. But he had an increasing disconnect with the real world, to the extent that horrible crimes were occurring nearby (in the physical and social senses) but he was completely insulated from the consequences for many years. Paterno’s story is s
Introduction: Charles Murray wrote a much-discussed new book, “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” David Frum quotes Murray as writing, in an echo of now-forgotten TV personality Tucker Carlson , that the top 5% of incomes “tends to be liberal—right? There’s no getting around it. Every way of answering this question produces a yes.” [I’ve interjected a “perhaps” into the title of this blog post to indicate that I don’t have the exact Murray quote here so I’m relying on David Frum’s interpretation.] Frum does me the favor of citing Red State Blue State as evidence, and I’d like to back this up with some graphs. Frum writes: Say “top 5%” to Murray, and his imagination conjures up everything he dislikes: coastal liberals listening to NPR in their Lexus hybrid SUVs. He sees that image so intensely that no mere number can force him to remember that the top 5% also includes the evangelical Christian assistant coach of a state university football team. . . . To put it i
6 0.76324683 1515 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-29-Jost Haidt
8 0.73163813 666 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-18-American Beliefs about Economic Opportunity and Income Inequality
11 0.72798723 1385 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-20-Reconciling different claims about working-class voters
12 0.72002906 1587 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-21-Red state blue state, or, states and counties are not persons
13 0.71833652 125 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-02-The moral of the story is, Don’t look yourself up on Google
14 0.71740496 924 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-24-“Income can’t be used to predict political opinion”
15 0.7138617 1300 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-05-Recently in the sister blog
16 0.71243757 1957 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-26-“The Inside Story Of The Harvard Dissertation That Became Too Racist For Heritage”
19 0.69967121 647 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-04-Irritating pseudo-populism, backed up by false statistics and implausible speculations
20 0.69623423 1229 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-25-Same old story
topicId topicWeight
[(15, 0.013), (16, 0.07), (21, 0.031), (24, 0.11), (39, 0.017), (41, 0.019), (55, 0.029), (65, 0.143), (77, 0.029), (82, 0.012), (95, 0.015), (98, 0.029), (99, 0.324)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.97884589 1021 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-21-Don’t judge a book by its title
Introduction: A correspondent writes: I just want to spend a few words to point you to this book I have just found on Amazon: “Understanding The New Statistics: Effect Sizes, Confidence Intervals, and Meta-Analysis” by G. Cumming. I have been attracted by the rather unusual and ‘sexy’ title but it seems to be nothing more than an attempt at alerting the psychology community on considering point estimation procedures and confidence intervals, in place of hypothesis testing, the latter being ‘a terrible idea!’ in the author’s own words. Some more quotes here . Then he says: “‘These are hardly new techniques, but I label them ‘The New Statistics’ because using them would for many researchers be quite new, as well as a highly beneficial change!’” Of course the latter is not stated on the book cover. That’s about as bad as writing a book with subtitle, “Why Americans vote the way they do,” but not actually telling the reader why Americans vote the way they do. I guess what I’m saying is:
2 0.971834 2062 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-15-Last word on Mister P (for now)
Introduction: To recap: Matt Buttice and Ben Highton recently published an article where they evaluated multilevel regression and poststratification (MRP) on a bunch of political examples estimating state-level attitudes. My Columbia colleagues Jeff Lax, Justin Phillips, and Yair Ghitza added some discussion , giving a bunch of practical tips and pointing to some problems with Buttice and Highton’s evaluations. Buttice and Highton replied , emphasizing the difficulties of comparing methods in the absence of a known ground truth. And Jeff Lax added the following comment, which I think is a good overview of the discussion so far: In the back and forth between us all on details, some points may get lost and disagreements overstated. Where are things at this point? 1. Buttice and Highton (BH) show beyond previous work that MRP performance in making state estimates can vary to an extent that is not directly observable unless one knows the true estimates (in which case one would not be us
3 0.96615672 2056 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-09-Mister P: What’s its secret sauce?
Introduction: This is a long and technical post on an important topic: the use of multilevel regression and poststratification (MRP) to estimate state-level public opinion. MRP as a research method, and state-level opinion (or, more generally, attitudes in demographic and geographic subpopulation) as a subject, have both become increasingly important in political science—and soon, I expect, will become increasingly important in other social sciences as well. Being able to estimate state-level opinion from national surveys is just such a powerful thing, that if it can be done, people will do it. It’s taken 15 years or so for the method to really catch on, but the ready availability of survey data and of computing power—as well as our increasing comfort level, as a profession, with these techniques, has made MRP become more of a routine research tool. As a method becomes used more and more widely, there will be natural concerns about its domains of applicability. That is the subject of the pres
4 0.96358716 1197 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-04-“All Models are Right, Most are Useless”
Introduction: The above is the title of a talk that Thad Tarpey gave at the Joint Statistical Meetings in 2009. Here’s the abstract: Students of statistics are often introduced to George Box’s famous quote: “all models are wrong, some are useful.” In this talk I [Tarpey] argue that this quote, although useful, is wrong. A different and more positive perspective is to acknowledge that a model is simply a means of extracting information of interest from data. The truth is infinitely complex and a model is merely an approximation to the truth. If the approximation is poor or misleading, then the model is useless. In this talk I give examples of correct models that are not true models. I illustrate how the notion of a “wrong” model can lead to wrong conclusions. I’m curious what he had to say—maybe he could post the slides? P.S. And here they are !
5 0.9623512 2061 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-14-More on Mister P and how it does what it does
Introduction: Following up on our discussion the other day, Matt Buttice and Ben Highton write: It was nice to see our article mentioned and discussed by Andrew, Jeff Lax, Justin Phillips, and Yair Ghitza on Andrew’s blog in this post on Wednesday. As noted in the post, we recently published an article in Political Analysis on how well multilevel regression and poststratification (MRP) performs at producing estimates of state opinion with conventional national surveys where N≈1,500. Our central claims are that (i) the performance of MRP is highly variable, (ii) in the absence of knowing the true values, it is difficult to determine the quality of the MRP estimates produced on the basis of a single national sample, and, (iii) therefore, our views about the usefulness of MRP in instances where a researcher has a single sample of N≈1,500 are less optimistic than the ones expressed in previous research on the topic. Obviously we were interested in the blog posts. We found them stimulating
7 0.96102679 1426 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-23-Special effects
8 0.9609161 457 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-07-Whassup with phantom-limb treatment?
9 0.95920545 1845 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-07-Is Felix Salmon wrong on free TV?
10 0.95891142 416 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-16-Is parenting a form of addiction?
11 0.95737648 1993 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-22-Improvements to Kindle Version of BDA3
same-blog 12 0.95731997 1819 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-23-Charles Murray’s “Coming Apart” and the measurement of social and political divisions
13 0.95730364 1333 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-20-Question 10 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
14 0.95036364 463 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-11-Compare p-values from privately funded medical trials to those in publicly funded research?
15 0.94977021 671 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-One more time-use graph
16 0.94859052 1811 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-18-Psychology experiments to understand what’s going on with data graphics?
17 0.94695657 2292 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-15-When you believe in things that you don’t understand
18 0.94527942 1365 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-04-Question 25 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
19 0.94394064 396 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-Journalism in the age of data
20 0.94081062 758 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-11-Hey, good news! Your p-value just passed the 0.05 threshold!