Skip to content
Archive of entries posted on

Nooooooooooooooooooo!

Michael Axelrod writes:

More bad news: The (mis)reporting of statistical results in psychology journals

Another entry in the growing literature on systematic flaws in the scientific research literature. This time the bad tidings come from Marjan Bakker and Jelte Wicherts, who write: Around 18% of statistical results in the psychological literature are incorrectly reported. Inconsistencies were more common in low-impact journals than in high-impact journals. Moreover, around 15% of […]

Articles on the philosophy of Bayesian statistics by Cox, Mayo, Senn, and others!

Deborah Mayo, Aris Spanos, and Kent Staley edited a special issue on the philosophy of Bayesian statistics for the journal Rationality, Markets and Morals. Here are the contents: David Cox and Deborah G. Mayo, “Statistical Scientist Meets a Philosopher of Science: A Conversation” Deborah G. Mayo, “Statistical Science and Philosophy of Science: Where Do/Should They […]

Hamiltonian Monte Carlo stories

Tomas Iesmantas had asked me for advice on a regression problem with 50 parameters, and I’d recommended Hamiltonian Monte Carlo. A few weeks later he reported back:

Wiley Wegman chutzpah update: Now you too can buy a selection of garbled Wikipedia articles, for a mere $1400-$2800 per year!

Someone passed on to a message from his university library announcing that the journal “Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics” is no longer free. Librarians have to decide what to do, so I thought I’d offer the following consumer guide: Wiley Computational Statistics journal Wikipedia Frequency 6 issues per year Continuously updated Includes articles from Wikipedia? […]

Visual diagnostics for discrete-data regressions

Jeff asked me what I thought of this recent AJPS article by Brian Greenhill, Michael Ward, and Audrey Sacks, “The Separation Plot: A New Visual Method for Evaluating the Fit of Binary Models.” It’s similar to a graph of observed vs. predicted values, but using color rather than the y-axis to display the observed values. […]

Hey, look over here! Another rant!

Bigshot establishment dude Peter Orszag thinks bigshot establishment dudes don’t have enough power. (Also politically related but not a rant: Joe McCarthy Versus Powerman and the Debt-Ceiling Destroyers, Part One.)

R and Google Visualization

Eric Tassone writes: Here’s something that may be of interest and useful to your readers, and which I [Tassone] am just now checking out myself. It links R and the Google Visualization API/Google Chart Tools to make Motion Charts (as used in the well known Hans Rosling TED talk) easier to create directly in R. […]

NYC

Our downstairs neighbor hates us. She looks away from us when we see them on the street, if we’re coming into the building at the same time she doesn’t hold open the door, and if we’re in the elevator when it stops on her floor, she refuses to get on. On the other hand, if […]

Ethnicity and Population Structure in Personal Naming Networks

Aleks pointed me to this recent article by Pablo Mateos, Paul Longley, and David O’Sullivan on one of my favorite topics. The authors produced a potentially cool naming network of the city of Auckland New Zealand. I say “potentially cool” because I have such difficulty reading the article–I speak English, statistics, and a bit of […]

Economists don’t think like accountants—but maybe they should

Joseph Delaney quotes Frances Woolley: In other words, the reason we care about inequality is that it reduces the happiness achievable from a given amount of income. How much depends upon the happiness/income relationship. Does the marginal utility of income fall rapidly? Or is the happiness from the 100,000th dollar almost as great as the […]

“Income can’t be used to predict political opinion”

What really irritates me about this column (by John Steele Gordon) is not how stupid it is (an article about “millionaires” that switches within the very same paragraph between “a nest egg of $1 million” and “a $1 million annual income” without acknowledging the difference between these concepts) or the ignorance it displays (no, it’s […]

What is the normal range of values in a medical test?

Geoffrey Sheean writes:






That odd couple, “subjectivity” and “rationality”

Nowadays “Bayesian” is often taken to be a synonym for rationality, and I can see how this can irritate thoughtful philosophers and statisticians alike: To start with, lots of rational thinking—even lots of rational statistical inference—does not occur within the Bayesian formalism. And, to look at it from the other direction, lots of self-proclaimed Bayesian […]

Top 10 blog obsessions

I was just thinking about this because we seem to be circling around the same few topics over and over (while occasionally slipping in some new statistical ideas):

Least surprising headline of the year

“Poker Web Site Cheated Users, U.S. Suit Says“ Shocking. Who’d have thought the developers of an online poker site would cheat??

Avoiding boundary estimates in linear mixed models

Pablo Verde sends in this letter he and Daniel Curcio just published in the Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. They had published a meta-analysis with a boundary estimate which, he said, gave nonsense results. Here’s Curcio and Verde’s key paragraph: The authors [of the study they are criticizing] performed a test of heterogeneity between studies. Given […]

Last post on Hipmunk

There was some confusion on my last try, so let me explain one more time . . .

Another Wegman plagiarism copying-without-attribution, and further discussion of why scientists cheat

Copying from Wikipedia but introducing an error in the process . . . how tacky is that?? I’ll discuss another minor outrage and then consider the more general question of what motivates researchers to plagiarize and otherwise break the rules of scholarship. If you’re gonna steal from Wikipedia, remember to preserve formatting or you might […]

Multimodality in hierarchical models

Jim Hodges posted a note to the Bugs mailing list that I thought could be of more general interest: