andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2014 andrew_gelman_stats-2014-2361 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: The story’s on the sister blog and I quote liberally from Jeremy Freese, who wrote : The authors have issued a statement that argues against some criticisms of their study that others have offered. These are irrelevant to the above observations, as I [Freese] am taking everything about the measurement and model specification at their word–my starting point is the model that fully replicates the analyses that they themselves published. A qualification is that one of their comments is that they deny they are making any claims about the importance of other factors that kill people in hurricanes. But they are. If you claim that 27 out of the 42 deaths in Hurricane Eloise would have been prevented if it was named Hurricane Charley, that is indeed a claim that diminishes the potential importance of other causes of deaths in that hurricane. Freese also raises an important general issue in science communication: The authors’ university issued a press release with a dramatic prese
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 The story’s on the sister blog and I quote liberally from Jeremy Freese, who wrote : The authors have issued a statement that argues against some criticisms of their study that others have offered. [sent-1, score-0.523]
2 These are irrelevant to the above observations, as I [Freese] am taking everything about the measurement and model specification at their word–my starting point is the model that fully replicates the analyses that they themselves published. [sent-2, score-0.135]
3 A qualification is that one of their comments is that they deny they are making any claims about the importance of other factors that kill people in hurricanes. [sent-3, score-0.349]
4 If you claim that 27 out of the 42 deaths in Hurricane Eloise would have been prevented if it was named Hurricane Charley, that is indeed a claim that diminishes the potential importance of other causes of deaths in that hurricane. [sent-5, score-0.635]
5 Freese also raises an important general issue in science communication: The authors’ university issued a press release with a dramatic presentation of results. [sent-6, score-0.493]
6 The release includes quotes from authors and a photo, as well as a quote from a prominent social psychologist calling the study “proof positive. [sent-7, score-0.445]
7 ” So this isn’t something that the media just stumbled across and made viral . [sent-8, score-0.377]
8 My view is that when researchers actively seek media attention for dramatic claims about real deaths, they make their work available for especial scrutiny by others. [sent-9, score-0.791]
9 In particular, I have lost patience with the idea the media are to blame for extreme presentations of scientists’ work, when extreme presentations of the scientists’ work are distributed to the media by the scientists’ employers [emphasis in the original]. [sent-11, score-1.15]
10 The underlying statistical issues are tricky, so when researchers don’t see a problem with their work, part of it can be simple misunderstanding of some subtle statistical principles which have only recently been studied carefully in some ways. [sent-14, score-0.111]
11 I pointed Freese to my post and he replied: Alas, if only your namesake hurricane had stayed farther south, all this could have been avoided. [sent-15, score-0.548]
12 Which made me think: Hurricane Andrew was pretty bad, and Hurricane Drew might been similar, but if it had been named Andy it could’ve been a real killer. [sent-16, score-0.1]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('freese', 0.433), ('hurricane', 0.4), ('media', 0.229), ('deaths', 0.182), ('release', 0.151), ('presentations', 0.145), ('scientists', 0.139), ('issued', 0.137), ('authors', 0.136), ('researchers', 0.111), ('dramatic', 0.111), ('claims', 0.102), ('named', 0.1), ('press', 0.094), ('qualification', 0.092), ('coda', 0.092), ('liberally', 0.092), ('backtrack', 0.092), ('importance', 0.091), ('extreme', 0.089), ('alas', 0.083), ('scrutiny', 0.083), ('quote', 0.081), ('impatient', 0.08), ('prevented', 0.08), ('work', 0.079), ('course', 0.078), ('confess', 0.078), ('photo', 0.078), ('study', 0.077), ('actively', 0.076), ('tabloid', 0.076), ('viral', 0.076), ('stayed', 0.076), ('employers', 0.074), ('stumbled', 0.072), ('hang', 0.072), ('farther', 0.072), ('patience', 0.071), ('replicates', 0.069), ('pnas', 0.068), ('andy', 0.067), ('drew', 0.067), ('jeremy', 0.067), ('hype', 0.067), ('understandable', 0.066), ('specification', 0.066), ('contributing', 0.064), ('tricky', 0.064), ('deny', 0.064)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999976 2361 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-06-Hurricanes vs. Himmicanes
Introduction: The story’s on the sister blog and I quote liberally from Jeremy Freese, who wrote : The authors have issued a statement that argues against some criticisms of their study that others have offered. These are irrelevant to the above observations, as I [Freese] am taking everything about the measurement and model specification at their word–my starting point is the model that fully replicates the analyses that they themselves published. A qualification is that one of their comments is that they deny they are making any claims about the importance of other factors that kill people in hurricanes. But they are. If you claim that 27 out of the 42 deaths in Hurricane Eloise would have been prevented if it was named Hurricane Charley, that is indeed a claim that diminishes the potential importance of other causes of deaths in that hurricane. Freese also raises an important general issue in science communication: The authors’ university issued a press release with a dramatic prese
2 0.15167743 2301 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-22-Ticket to Baaaaarf
Introduction: A link from the comments here took me to the wonderfully named Barfblog and a report by Don Schaffner on some reporting. First, the background: A university in England issued a press release saying that “Food picked up just a few seconds after being dropped is less likely to contain bacteria than if it is left for longer periods of time . . . The findings suggest there may be some scientific basis to the ‘5 second rule’ – the urban myth about it being fine to eat food that has only had contact with the floor for five seconds or less. Although people have long followed the 5 second rule, until now it was unclear whether it actually helped.” According to the press release, the study was “undertaken by final year Biology students” and led by a professor of microbiology. The press release hit the big time, hitting NPR, Slate, Forbes, the Daily News, etc etc. Some typical headlines: “5-second rule backed up by science” — Atlanta Journal Constitution “Eating food off the floo
3 0.14636919 2006 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-03-Evaluating evidence from published research
Introduction: Following up on my entry the other day on post-publication peer review, Dan Kahan writes: You give me credit, I think, for merely participating in what I think is a systemic effect in the practice of empirical inquiry that conduces to quality control & hence the advance of knowledge by such means (likely the title conveys that!). I’d say: (a) by far the greatest weakness in the “publication regime” in social sciences today is the systematic disregard for basic principles of valid causal inference, a deficiency either in comprehension or craft that is at the root of scholars’ resort to (and journals’ tolerance for) invalid samples, the employment of designs that don’t generate observations more consistent with a hypothesis than with myriad rival ones, and the resort to deficient statistical modes of analysis that treat detection of “statististically significant difference” rather than “practical corroboration of practical meaningful effect” as the goal of such analysis (especial
4 0.11624043 828 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-28-Thoughts on Groseclose book on media bias
Introduction: Respected political scientist Tim Groseclose just came out with a book, “Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind.” I was familiar with Groseclose’s article (with Jeffrey Milyo) on media bias that came out several years ago–it was an interesting study but I was not convinced by its central claim that they were measuring an absolute level of bias–and then recently heard about this new book in the context of some intemperate things Groseclose said in a interview on the conservative Fox TV network. Groseclose’s big conclusion is that in the absence of media bias, the average American voter would be positioned at around 25 on a 0-100 scale, where 0 is a right-wing Republican and 100 is a left-wing Democrat. (Seeing as the number line is conventionally drawn from left to right, I think it would make more sense for 0 to represent the left and 100 to be on the right, but I guess it’s too late for him to change now.) Groseclose places the average voter now at around
5 0.10027171 1878 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-31-How to fix the tabloids? Toward replicable social science research
Introduction: This seems to be the topic of the week. Yesterday I posted on the sister blog some further thoughts on those “Psychological Science” papers on menstrual cycles, biceps size, and political attitudes, tied to a horrible press release from the journal Psychological Science hyping the biceps and politics study. Then I was pointed to these suggestions from Richard Lucas and M. Brent Donnellan have on improving the replicability and reproducibility of research published in the Journal of Research in Personality: It goes without saying that editors of scientific journals strive to publish research that is not only theoretically interesting but also methodologically rigorous. The goal is to select papers that advance the field. Accordingly, editors want to publish findings that can be reproduced and replicated by other scientists. Unfortunately, there has been a recent “crisis in confidence” among psychologists about the quality of psychological research (Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012)
6 0.092073485 1435 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-30-Retracted articles and unethical behavior in economics journals?
7 0.091518819 2236 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-07-Selection bias in the reporting of shaky research
9 0.087413654 2084 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-01-Doing Data Science: What’s it all about?
12 0.081396937 2215 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-17-The Washington Post reprints university press releases without editing them
13 0.080923751 2269 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-27-Beyond the Valley of the Trolls
14 0.080012083 2151 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-27-Should statistics have a Nobel prize?
16 0.078261934 1139 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-26-Suggested resolution of the Bem paradox
17 0.078094609 1844 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-06-Against optimism about social science
20 0.077022806 2137 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-17-Replication backlash
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.157), (1, -0.045), (2, -0.034), (3, -0.09), (4, -0.045), (5, -0.026), (6, -0.017), (7, -0.044), (8, -0.013), (9, 0.015), (10, -0.006), (11, 0.033), (12, -0.011), (13, 0.007), (14, -0.005), (15, 0.011), (16, -0.01), (17, 0.016), (18, -0.012), (19, -0.005), (20, -0.002), (21, -0.022), (22, -0.075), (23, -0.006), (24, 0.0), (25, 0.016), (26, 0.004), (27, -0.021), (28, 0.026), (29, -0.026), (30, -0.041), (31, 0.015), (32, -0.008), (33, -0.004), (34, 0.015), (35, 0.041), (36, 0.004), (37, -0.015), (38, -0.014), (39, -0.016), (40, 0.024), (41, -0.034), (42, 0.014), (43, -0.024), (44, -0.006), (45, 0.019), (46, 0.02), (47, 0.016), (48, -0.003), (49, -0.032)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.97244418 2361 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-06-Hurricanes vs. Himmicanes
Introduction: The story’s on the sister blog and I quote liberally from Jeremy Freese, who wrote : The authors have issued a statement that argues against some criticisms of their study that others have offered. These are irrelevant to the above observations, as I [Freese] am taking everything about the measurement and model specification at their word–my starting point is the model that fully replicates the analyses that they themselves published. A qualification is that one of their comments is that they deny they are making any claims about the importance of other factors that kill people in hurricanes. But they are. If you claim that 27 out of the 42 deaths in Hurricane Eloise would have been prevented if it was named Hurricane Charley, that is indeed a claim that diminishes the potential importance of other causes of deaths in that hurricane. Freese also raises an important general issue in science communication: The authors’ university issued a press release with a dramatic prese
2 0.82019383 1878 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-31-How to fix the tabloids? Toward replicable social science research
Introduction: This seems to be the topic of the week. Yesterday I posted on the sister blog some further thoughts on those “Psychological Science” papers on menstrual cycles, biceps size, and political attitudes, tied to a horrible press release from the journal Psychological Science hyping the biceps and politics study. Then I was pointed to these suggestions from Richard Lucas and M. Brent Donnellan have on improving the replicability and reproducibility of research published in the Journal of Research in Personality: It goes without saying that editors of scientific journals strive to publish research that is not only theoretically interesting but also methodologically rigorous. The goal is to select papers that advance the field. Accordingly, editors want to publish findings that can be reproduced and replicated by other scientists. Unfortunately, there has been a recent “crisis in confidence” among psychologists about the quality of psychological research (Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012)
3 0.80682176 1055 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-13-Data sharing update
Introduction: Fred Oswald reports that Sian Beilock sent him sufficient amounts of raw data from her research study so allow him to answer his questions about the large effects that were observed. This sort of collegiality is central to the collective scientific enterprise. The bad news is that IRB’s are still getting in the way. Beilock was very helpful but she had to work within the constraints of her IRB, which apparently advised her not to share data—even if de-identified—without getting lots more permissions. Oswald writes: It is a little concerning that the IRB bars the sharing of de-identified data, particularly in light of the specific guidelines of the journal Science, which appears to say that when you submit a study to the journal for publication, you are allowing for the sharing of de-identified data — unless you expressly say otherwise at the point that you submit the paper for consideration. Again, I don’t blame Beilock and Ramirez—they appear to have been as helpful as
4 0.80488968 2301 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-22-Ticket to Baaaaarf
Introduction: A link from the comments here took me to the wonderfully named Barfblog and a report by Don Schaffner on some reporting. First, the background: A university in England issued a press release saying that “Food picked up just a few seconds after being dropped is less likely to contain bacteria than if it is left for longer periods of time . . . The findings suggest there may be some scientific basis to the ‘5 second rule’ – the urban myth about it being fine to eat food that has only had contact with the floor for five seconds or less. Although people have long followed the 5 second rule, until now it was unclear whether it actually helped.” According to the press release, the study was “undertaken by final year Biology students” and led by a professor of microbiology. The press release hit the big time, hitting NPR, Slate, Forbes, the Daily News, etc etc. Some typical headlines: “5-second rule backed up by science” — Atlanta Journal Constitution “Eating food off the floo
5 0.8010537 1128 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-19-Sharon Begley: Worse than Stephen Jay Gould?
Introduction: Commenter Tggp links to a criticism of science journalist Sharon Begley by science journalist Matthew Hutson. I learned of this dispute after reporting that Begley had received the American Statistical Association’s Excellence in Statistical Reporting Award, a completely undeserved honor, if Hutson is to believed. The two journalists have somewhat similar profiles: Begley was science editor at Newsweek (she’s now at Reuters) and author of “Train Your Mind, Change Your Brain: How a New Science Reveals Our Extraordinary Potential to Transform Ourselves,” and Hutson was news editor at Psychology Today and wrote the similarly self-helpy-titled, “The 7 Laws of Magical Thinking: How Irrational Beliefs Keep Us Happy, Healthy, and Sane.” Hutson writes : Psychological Science recently published a fascinating new study on jealousy. I was interested to read Newsweek’s 1300-word article covering the research by their science editor, Sharon Begley. But part-way through the article, I
6 0.80043054 2241 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-10-Preregistration: what’s in it for you?
7 0.79728055 2220 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-22-Quickies
8 0.78598469 2006 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-03-Evaluating evidence from published research
9 0.78416467 1860 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-17-How can statisticians help psychologists do their research better?
10 0.78286767 2236 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-07-Selection bias in the reporting of shaky research
11 0.77966624 1959 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-28-50 shades of gray: A research story
12 0.77900141 1844 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-06-Against optimism about social science
14 0.76699132 1949 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-21-Defensive political science responds defensively to an attack on social science
15 0.76574147 2179 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-20-The AAA Tranche of Subprime Science
16 0.76549703 1671 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-13-Preregistration of Studies and Mock Reports
19 0.75792313 908 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-14-Type M errors in the lab
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.053), (9, 0.036), (12, 0.038), (13, 0.042), (15, 0.034), (16, 0.053), (19, 0.021), (21, 0.044), (24, 0.09), (40, 0.025), (41, 0.014), (43, 0.033), (44, 0.015), (49, 0.034), (53, 0.058), (63, 0.012), (88, 0.015), (98, 0.014), (99, 0.259)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.96002883 2361 andrew gelman stats-2014-06-06-Hurricanes vs. Himmicanes
Introduction: The story’s on the sister blog and I quote liberally from Jeremy Freese, who wrote : The authors have issued a statement that argues against some criticisms of their study that others have offered. These are irrelevant to the above observations, as I [Freese] am taking everything about the measurement and model specification at their word–my starting point is the model that fully replicates the analyses that they themselves published. A qualification is that one of their comments is that they deny they are making any claims about the importance of other factors that kill people in hurricanes. But they are. If you claim that 27 out of the 42 deaths in Hurricane Eloise would have been prevented if it was named Hurricane Charley, that is indeed a claim that diminishes the potential importance of other causes of deaths in that hurricane. Freese also raises an important general issue in science communication: The authors’ university issued a press release with a dramatic prese
2 0.92628175 1942 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-17-“Stop and frisk” statistics
Introduction: Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen brings up one of my research topics: In New York City, blacks make up a quarter of the population, yet they represent 78 percent of all shooting suspects — almost all of them young men. We know them from the nightly news. Those statistics represent the justification for New York City’s controversial stop-and-frisk program, which amounts to racial profiling writ large. After all, if young black males are your shooters, then it ought to be young black males whom the police stop and frisk. I have two comments on this. First, my research with Jeff Fagan and Alex Kiss (based on data from the late 1990s, so maybe things have changed) found that the NYPD was stopping blacks and hispanics at a rate higher than their previous arrest rates: To briefly summarize our findings, blacks and Hispanics represented 51% and 33% of the stops while representing only 26% and 24% of the New York City population. Compared with the number of arrests of
3 0.92483628 1861 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-17-Where do theories come from?
Introduction: Lee Sechrest sends along this article by Brian Haig and writes that it “presents what seems to me a useful perspective on much of what scientists/statisticians do and how science works, at least in the fields in which I work.” Here’s Haig’s abstract: A broad theory of scientific method is sketched that has particular relevance for the behavioral sciences. This theory of method assembles a complex of specific strategies and methods that are used in the detection of empirical phenomena and the subsequent construction of explanatory theories. A characterization of the nature of phenomena is given, and the process of their detection is briefly described in terms of a multistage model of data analysis. The construction of explanatory theories is shown to involve their generation through abductive, or explanatory, reasoning, their development through analogical modeling, and their fuller appraisal in terms of judgments of the best of competing explanations. The nature and limits of
4 0.92409807 2313 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-30-Seth Roberts
Introduction: I met Seth back in the early 1990s when we were both professors at the University of California. He sometimes came to the statistics department seminar and we got to talking about various things; in particular we shared an interest in statistical graphics. Much of my work in this direction eventually went toward the use of graphical displays to understand fitted models. Seth went in another direction and got interested in the role of exploratory data analysis in science, the idea that we could use graphs not just to test or even understand a model but also as the source of new hypotheses. We continued to discuss these issues over the years; see here , for example. At some point when we were at Berkeley the administration was encouraging the faculty to teach freshman seminars, and I had the idea of teaching a course on left-handedness. I’d just read the book by Stanley Coren and thought it would be fun to go through it with a class, chapter by chapter. But my knowledge of psych
5 0.92358661 1177 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-20-Joshua Clover update
Introduction: Surfing the blogroll , I found myself on Helen DeWitt’s page and noticed the link to the Joshua Clover, alias Jane Dark. I hadn’t checked out Clover for awhile (see my reactions here and here ), so I decided to head on over. Here’s what it looked like: “The case against the Federal minimum wage,” huh? That surprised me, as I had the vague impression that Clover was on the far left of the American political spectrum. But I guess he could have some sort of wonky thing going on, or maybe there’s some unexpected twist? It seemed a bit off of Clover’s usual cultural-criticism beat, so I clicked through to take a look . . . and it was just a boring set of paragraphs on the minimum wage. Hmmmm. I went back to the homepage, looked around more carefully, and realized that the blog is fake, the online equivalent of those fake book spines that are used to simulate rows of books on a bookshelf. I don’t know what happened. My guess is that Clover got tired of blogging and
7 0.92240113 792 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-08-The virtues of incoherence?
8 0.92234772 2006 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-03-Evaluating evidence from published research
10 0.92217481 499 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-03-5 books
11 0.92194372 1007 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-13-At last, treated with the disrespect that I deserve
12 0.92173624 635 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-29-Bayesian spam!
13 0.92173195 2091 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-06-“Marginally significant”
14 0.92140317 1282 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-26-Bad news about (some) statisticians
15 0.92139149 495 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-31-“Threshold earners” and economic inequality
16 0.92126477 248 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-01-Ratios where the numerator and denominator both change signs
17 0.92079681 675 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-22-Arrow’s other theorem
18 0.92075378 2142 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-21-Chasing the noise
19 0.92069238 125 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-02-The moral of the story is, Don’t look yourself up on Google
20 0.92061472 2158 andrew gelman stats-2014-01-03-Booze: Been There. Done That.