andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2013 andrew_gelman_stats-2013-1915 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: I received the following bizarre email: Apr 26, 2013 Dear Andrew Gelman You are receiving this notice because you have published a paper with the American Journal of Public Health within the last few years. Currently, content on the Journal is closed access for the first 2 years after publication, and then freely accessible thereafter. On June 1, 2013, the Journal will be extending its closed-access window from 2 years to 10 years. Extending this window will close public access to your article via the Journal web portal, but public access will still be available via the National Institutes of Health PubMedCentral web portal. If you would like to make your article available to the public for free on the Journal web portal, we are extending this limited time offer of open access at a steeply discounted rate of $1,000 per article. If interested in purchasing this access, please contact Brian Selzer, Publications Editor, at brian.selzer@apha.org Additionally, you may purchas
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 I received the following bizarre email: Apr 26, 2013 Dear Andrew Gelman You are receiving this notice because you have published a paper with the American Journal of Public Health within the last few years. [sent-1, score-0.13]
2 Currently, content on the Journal is closed access for the first 2 years after publication, and then freely accessible thereafter. [sent-2, score-0.561]
3 On June 1, 2013, the Journal will be extending its closed-access window from 2 years to 10 years. [sent-3, score-0.343]
4 Extending this window will close public access to your article via the Journal web portal, but public access will still be available via the National Institutes of Health PubMedCentral web portal. [sent-4, score-1.556]
5 If you would like to make your article available to the public for free on the Journal web portal, we are extending this limited time offer of open access at a steeply discounted rate of $1,000 per article. [sent-5, score-1.424]
6 If interested in purchasing this access, please contact Brian Selzer, Publications Editor, at brian. [sent-6, score-0.279]
7 org Additionally, you may purchase a Noncommercial Common Use License (NCUL) for $500. [sent-8, score-0.15]
8 This license enables readers to use your article for noncommercial purposes without the need to purchase permissions, and it also permits free reproduction of your article. [sent-9, score-0.972]
9 The NCUL does NOT permit reproduction in commercial products such as book chapters or Journal articles. [sent-10, score-0.406]
10 If interested, please contact Brian Selzer, Publications Editor, at brian. [sent-12, score-0.183]
11 I supply them with content for free (this is part of the “research and service” aspect of my job), and this is their attitude? [sent-18, score-0.202]
12 I can’t actually remember writing anything for the AJPH and I searched their website and couldn’t find any papers by me there. [sent-23, score-0.071]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('selzer', 0.315), ('access', 0.266), ('journal', 0.214), ('ncul', 0.21), ('noncommercial', 0.21), ('portal', 0.21), ('extending', 0.208), ('brian', 0.195), ('reproduction', 0.191), ('steeply', 0.191), ('public', 0.185), ('discounted', 0.18), ('publications', 0.166), ('editor', 0.152), ('purchase', 0.15), ('license', 0.145), ('web', 0.137), ('window', 0.135), ('health', 0.118), ('contact', 0.105), ('free', 0.105), ('american', 0.104), ('content', 0.097), ('permissions', 0.096), ('purchasing', 0.096), ('ajph', 0.096), ('purchased', 0.09), ('permit', 0.09), ('enables', 0.09), ('via', 0.084), ('permits', 0.081), ('permission', 0.081), ('institutes', 0.081), ('please', 0.078), ('available', 0.077), ('apr', 0.077), ('rate', 0.075), ('additionally', 0.075), ('searched', 0.071), ('freely', 0.071), ('sincerely', 0.07), ('bizarre', 0.07), ('rude', 0.069), ('closed', 0.066), ('dear', 0.065), ('commercial', 0.065), ('june', 0.064), ('accessible', 0.061), ('receiving', 0.06), ('products', 0.06)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999988 1915 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-27-Huh?
Introduction: I received the following bizarre email: Apr 26, 2013 Dear Andrew Gelman You are receiving this notice because you have published a paper with the American Journal of Public Health within the last few years. Currently, content on the Journal is closed access for the first 2 years after publication, and then freely accessible thereafter. On June 1, 2013, the Journal will be extending its closed-access window from 2 years to 10 years. Extending this window will close public access to your article via the Journal web portal, but public access will still be available via the National Institutes of Health PubMedCentral web portal. If you would like to make your article available to the public for free on the Journal web portal, we are extending this limited time offer of open access at a steeply discounted rate of $1,000 per article. If interested in purchasing this access, please contact Brian Selzer, Publications Editor, at brian.selzer@apha.org Additionally, you may purchas
2 0.32416248 1916 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-27-The weirdest thing about the AJPH story
Introduction: Earlier today I posted a weird email that began with “You are receiving this notice because you have published a paper with the American Journal of Public Health within the last few years” and continued with a sleazy attempt to squeeze $1000 out of me so that an article that I sent them for free could be available to the public. $1000 might seem like a lot, but they assured me that “we are extending this limited time offer of open access at a steeply discounted rate.” Sort of like a Vegematic but without that set of Ginsu knives thrown in for free. But then when I was responding to comments, I realized that . . . I didn’t actually remember ever publishing anything in that journal. It’s not on my list of 100+ journals. I did a search on my published papers page and couldn’t find anything closer than the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health (and that was not within the last few years). I checked Google Scholar. And then I went straight to the AJPH webpage and sea
3 0.19206302 58 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-29-Stupid legal crap
Introduction: From the website of a journal where I published an article: In Springer journals you have the choice of publishing with or without open access. If you choose open access, your article will be freely available to everyone everywhere. In exchange for an open access fee of â‚Ź 2000 / US $3000 you retain the copyright and your article will carry the Creative Commons License. Please make your choice below. Hmmm . . . pay $3000 so that an article that I wrote and gave to the journal for free can be accessed by others? Sounds like a good deal to me!
4 0.10498978 2244 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-11-What if I were to stop publishing in journals?
Introduction: In our recent discussion of modes of publication, Joseph Wilson wrote, “The single best reform science can make right now is to decouple publication from career advancement, thereby reducing the number of publications by an order of magnitude and then move to an entirely disjointed, informal, online free-for-all communication system for research results.” My first thought on this was: Sure, yeah, that makes sense. But then I got to thinking: what would it really mean to decouple publication from career advancement? This is too late for me—I’m middle-aged and have no career advancement in my future—but it got me thinking more carefully about the role of publication in the research process, and this seemed worth a blog (the simplest sort of publication available to me). However, somewhere between writing the above paragraphs and writing the blog entry, I forgot exactly what I was going to say! I guess I should’ve just typed it all in then. In the old days I just wouldn’t run this
5 0.10419872 1872 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-27-More spam!
Introduction: I just got this one today: Dear Dr. Gelman, I am pleased to inform you that the ** team has identified your recent publication, “Philosophy and the practice of Bayesian statistics.” as being of special interest to the progress in the Psychology field. We would like to list your publication on our next edition of the ** series. ** alerts the scientific community to breaking journal articles considered to represent the best in Psychology research. For today’s edition, click here. ** is viewed almost 40,000 times each month and has an audience of academic and clinical personnel from a growing number of the top 20 major academic institutions. Publications featured by ** gain extensive exposure. This exposure may benefit you and your organization since this provides a showcase for key research studies such as yours. This exposure has the added benefit of encouraging additional funding. There is a small processing charge for listing publications on ** ($35). Please let us know
6 0.10130323 1820 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-23-Foundation for Open Access Statistics
7 0.10097905 2304 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-24-An open site for researchers to post and share papers
8 0.097878605 1393 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-26-The reverse-journal-submission system
9 0.097217351 1175 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-19-Factual – a new place to find data
10 0.096383028 2233 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-04-Literal vs. rhetorical
12 0.091634929 2013 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-08-What we need here is some peer review for statistical graphics
13 0.090661407 2111 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-23-Tables > figures yet again
14 0.089381106 15 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-03-Public Opinion on Health Care Reform
15 0.08734262 2245 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-12-More on publishing in journals
16 0.08686015 2148 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-25-Spam!
17 0.08660952 458 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-08-Blogging: Is it “fair use”?
18 0.084328704 834 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-01-I owe it all to the haters
19 0.08237718 2080 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-28-Writing for free
20 0.077672765 793 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-09-R on the cloud
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.109), (1, -0.07), (2, -0.057), (3, -0.052), (4, -0.023), (5, 0.016), (6, -0.008), (7, -0.116), (8, -0.066), (9, 0.004), (10, 0.077), (11, -0.046), (12, 0.005), (13, 0.078), (14, -0.024), (15, 0.012), (16, 0.042), (17, -0.019), (18, -0.005), (19, 0.028), (20, 0.044), (21, 0.057), (22, 0.074), (23, -0.031), (24, 0.001), (25, 0.013), (26, -0.02), (27, -0.015), (28, 0.014), (29, 0.005), (30, -0.063), (31, -0.063), (32, -0.014), (33, 0.056), (34, -0.022), (35, -0.034), (36, 0.006), (37, 0.017), (38, 0.044), (39, 0.011), (40, 0.04), (41, -0.014), (42, -0.036), (43, 0.015), (44, -0.015), (45, 0.02), (46, -0.037), (47, -0.036), (48, -0.013), (49, -0.028)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.98506063 1915 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-27-Huh?
Introduction: I received the following bizarre email: Apr 26, 2013 Dear Andrew Gelman You are receiving this notice because you have published a paper with the American Journal of Public Health within the last few years. Currently, content on the Journal is closed access for the first 2 years after publication, and then freely accessible thereafter. On June 1, 2013, the Journal will be extending its closed-access window from 2 years to 10 years. Extending this window will close public access to your article via the Journal web portal, but public access will still be available via the National Institutes of Health PubMedCentral web portal. If you would like to make your article available to the public for free on the Journal web portal, we are extending this limited time offer of open access at a steeply discounted rate of $1,000 per article. If interested in purchasing this access, please contact Brian Selzer, Publications Editor, at brian.selzer@apha.org Additionally, you may purchas
2 0.84867477 58 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-29-Stupid legal crap
Introduction: From the website of a journal where I published an article: In Springer journals you have the choice of publishing with or without open access. If you choose open access, your article will be freely available to everyone everywhere. In exchange for an open access fee of â‚Ź 2000 / US $3000 you retain the copyright and your article will carry the Creative Commons License. Please make your choice below. Hmmm . . . pay $3000 so that an article that I wrote and gave to the journal for free can be accessed by others? Sounds like a good deal to me!
3 0.7969985 1916 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-27-The weirdest thing about the AJPH story
Introduction: Earlier today I posted a weird email that began with “You are receiving this notice because you have published a paper with the American Journal of Public Health within the last few years” and continued with a sleazy attempt to squeeze $1000 out of me so that an article that I sent them for free could be available to the public. $1000 might seem like a lot, but they assured me that “we are extending this limited time offer of open access at a steeply discounted rate.” Sort of like a Vegematic but without that set of Ginsu knives thrown in for free. But then when I was responding to comments, I realized that . . . I didn’t actually remember ever publishing anything in that journal. It’s not on my list of 100+ journals. I did a search on my published papers page and couldn’t find anything closer than the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health (and that was not within the last few years). I checked Google Scholar. And then I went straight to the AJPH webpage and sea
4 0.79680949 2239 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-09-Reviewing the peer review process?
Introduction: I received the following email: Dear Colleague, Recently we informed you about SciRev, our new website where researchers can share their experiences with the peer review process and select an efficient journal for submitting their work. Since our start, we already received over 500 reviews and many positive reactions, which reveal a great need for comparable information on duration and quality of the review process. All reviews are publicly available on our website, both at the pages of the journals and in an overview at www.scirev.sc/reviews To make this venture a success, many reviews are needed. We therefore would appreciate it very much if you could take a few minutes to visit our website www.SciRev.sc and share your recent review experiences with your colleagues. SciRev also offers you the possibility to create a free account where you can administer your manuscripts under review and create a personal journal list. Thanks on behalf of the research community, Jan
5 0.77970719 1872 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-27-More spam!
Introduction: I just got this one today: Dear Dr. Gelman, I am pleased to inform you that the ** team has identified your recent publication, “Philosophy and the practice of Bayesian statistics.” as being of special interest to the progress in the Psychology field. We would like to list your publication on our next edition of the ** series. ** alerts the scientific community to breaking journal articles considered to represent the best in Psychology research. For today’s edition, click here. ** is viewed almost 40,000 times each month and has an audience of academic and clinical personnel from a growing number of the top 20 major academic institutions. Publications featured by ** gain extensive exposure. This exposure may benefit you and your organization since this provides a showcase for key research studies such as yours. This exposure has the added benefit of encouraging additional funding. There is a small processing charge for listing publications on ** ($35). Please let us know
6 0.74615175 1922 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-02-They want me to send them free material and pay for the privilege
7 0.71417761 2304 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-24-An open site for researchers to post and share papers
8 0.69360781 1429 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-26-Our broken scholarly publishing system
9 0.68288368 577 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-16-Annals of really really stupid spam
10 0.66958869 1820 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-23-Foundation for Open Access Statistics
11 0.66595751 2148 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-25-Spam!
13 0.66097963 834 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-01-I owe it all to the haters
14 0.65767378 1118 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-14-A model rejection letter
15 0.65435636 1911 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-23-AI Stats conference on Stan etc.
16 0.64986503 1618 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-11-The consulting biz
17 0.64939517 282 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-17-I can’t escape it
18 0.63862586 2095 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-09-Typo in Ghitza and Gelman MRP paper
19 0.62851471 1321 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-15-A statistical research project: Weeding out the fraudulent citations
20 0.61428583 1393 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-26-The reverse-journal-submission system
topicId topicWeight
[(13, 0.013), (15, 0.085), (16, 0.049), (24, 0.051), (29, 0.345), (30, 0.016), (45, 0.029), (63, 0.019), (77, 0.017), (80, 0.016), (86, 0.025), (99, 0.187)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.8494848 1915 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-27-Huh?
Introduction: I received the following bizarre email: Apr 26, 2013 Dear Andrew Gelman You are receiving this notice because you have published a paper with the American Journal of Public Health within the last few years. Currently, content on the Journal is closed access for the first 2 years after publication, and then freely accessible thereafter. On June 1, 2013, the Journal will be extending its closed-access window from 2 years to 10 years. Extending this window will close public access to your article via the Journal web portal, but public access will still be available via the National Institutes of Health PubMedCentral web portal. If you would like to make your article available to the public for free on the Journal web portal, we are extending this limited time offer of open access at a steeply discounted rate of $1,000 per article. If interested in purchasing this access, please contact Brian Selzer, Publications Editor, at brian.selzer@apha.org Additionally, you may purchas
2 0.82781637 764 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-14-Examining US Legislative process with “Many Bills”
Introduction: This is Many Bills , a visualization of US bills by IBM: I learned about it a few days ago from Irene Ros at Foo Camp . It definitely looks better than my own analysis of US Senate bills .
3 0.76344496 651 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-06-My talk at Northwestern University tomorrow (Thursday)
Introduction: Of Beauty, Sex, and Power: Statistical Challenges in Estimating Small Effects. At the Institute of Policy Research, Thurs 7 Apr 2011, 3.30pm . Regular blog readers know all about this topic. ( Here are the slides.) But, rest assured, I don’t just mock. I also offer constructive suggestions. My last talk at Northwestern was fifteen years ago. Actually, I gave two lectures then, in the process of being turned down for a job enjoying their chilly Midwestern hospitality. P.S. I searched on the web and also found this announcement which gives the wrong title.
4 0.7015909 1687 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-21-Workshop on science communication for graduate students
Introduction: Nathan Sanders writes: Applications are now open for the Communicating Science 2013 workshop (http://workshop.astrobites.com/), to be held in Cambridge, MA on June 13-15th, 2013. Graduate students at US institutions in all fields of science and engineering are encouraged to apply – funding is available for travel expenses and accommodations. The application can be found here: http://workshop.astrobites.org/application Participants will build the communication skills that technical professionals need to express complex ideas to their peers, experts in other fields, and the general public. There will be panel discussions on the following topics: * Engaging Non-Scientific Audiences * Science Writing for a Cause * Communicating Science Through Fiction * Sharing Science with Scientists * The World of Non-Academic Publishing * Communicating using Multimedia and the Web In addition to these discussions, ample time is allotted for interacting with the experts and with att
5 0.67869925 1034 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-29-World Class Speakers and Entertainers
Introduction: In our discussion of historian Niall Ferguson and piss-poor monocausal social science, commenter Matt W. pointed to Ferguson’s listing at a speakers bureau. One of his talks is entitled “Is This the Chinese Century?” The question mark at the end seems to give him some wiggle room. I give some paid lectures myself and was curious to learn more about this organization, World Class Speakers and Entertainers, so I clicked through to this list of topics and then searched for Statistics. Amazingly enough, there was a “Statistician” category (right above “Story Teller / Lore / Art / Power of Story Telling,” “Strategist / Strategies / Strategic Planning,” and “Success”). There I found Gopal C. Dorai, Ph.D. , who offers insights such as “vegetarians usually will not eat meat products, no matter how hungry they feel.” And “Cheating or lying for the sake of obtaining favorable treatment from others will be anathema to some people.” And “Life is a one-way-street; we cannot turn the c
6 0.66519117 1940 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-16-A poll that throws away data???
7 0.65326345 1539 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-18-IRB nightmares
8 0.63104951 1533 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-14-If x is correlated with y, then y is correlated with x
9 0.62706447 1344 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-25-Question 15 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
10 0.60587198 1345 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-26-Question 16 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
11 0.60289854 1491 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-10-Update on Levitt paper on child car seats
12 0.59389931 1024 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-23-Of hypothesis tests and Unitarians
14 0.58604699 2057 andrew gelman stats-2013-10-10-Chris Chabris is irritated by Malcolm Gladwell
15 0.58367461 2133 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-13-Flexibility is good
16 0.58342367 1916 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-27-The weirdest thing about the AJPH story
17 0.58323324 1392 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-26-Occam
18 0.56941152 868 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-24-Blogs vs. real journalism
19 0.56882071 1742 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-27-What is “explanation”?