15-2040 != 19-3010 (and, for that matter, 25-1022 != 25-1063).

## Classification error

Posted by Andrew on 2 March 2013, 5:01 pm

15-2040 != 19-3010 (and, for that matter, 25-1022 != 25-1063).

## Recent Comments

- WB on Bernard-Henry Levy (3) vs. Jacques Derrida; Carlin advances
- Martyn on Bernard-Henry Levy (3) vs. Jacques Derrida; Carlin advances
- Data Viz News [80] | Visualoop on My course on Statistical Communication and Graphics
- Keith O'Rourke on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Bernard-Henry Levy (3) vs. Jacques Derrida; Carlin advances - Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science on I need your help in setting up the ultimate bracket: Picking the ideal seminar speaker
- jimmy on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Fernando on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Israel on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Bill Harris on Introducing shinyStan
- martin on One simple trick to make Stan run faster
- Andrew on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Rahul on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Kyle C on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Rahul on One simple trick to make Stan run faster
- Winston Lin on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Alex Reinhart on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Anonymous on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Susan on Why ask why? Forward causal inference and reverse causal questions
- Dan Wright on These are the statistics papers you just
*have*to read - Jonah Sol Gabry on Introducing shinyStan

## Categories

I understand the BLS SOC codes, but I have absolutely no idea what connection Econominst != Statistician could possibly have to do with that column about ultimate frisbee.

Rather than writing a blog post about the dangers of misclassification, you cleverly demonstrated its effects by posting an irrelevant article from the NYT.

Nice article about ultimate frisbee, though. (Thanks to the commenters for enlightening me, I had no idea what was going on. Look forward to seeing what the correct link is …)

I presume our host plays ultimate frisbee and does not consider himself an economist?