Skip to content
Archive of entries posted by

Graph too clever by half

Mike Carniello writes: I wondered what you make of this. I pay for the NYT online and tablet – but not paper, so I don’t know how they’re representing this content in two dimensions. I’ve paged through the thing a couple of times, not sure how useful it is – it seems like a series […]

Publication bias occurs within as well as between projects

Kent Holsinger points to this post by Kevin Drum entitled, “Publication Bias Is Boring. You Should Care About It Anyway,” and writes: I am an evolutionary biologist, not a psychologist, but this article describes a disturbing Scenario concerning oxytocin research that seems plausible. It is also relevant to the reproducibility/publishing issues you have been discussing […]

Evaluating election forecasts

Nadia Hassan writes: Nate Silver did a review of pre-election predictions from forecasting models in 2012. The overall results were not great, but many scholars noted that some models seemed to do quite well. You mentioned that you were interested in how top-notch models fare. Nate agreed that some were better, but he raised the […]

Birthdays and heat waves

I mentioned the birthdays example in a talk the other day, and Hal Varian pointed me to some research by David Lam and Jeffrey Miron, papers from the 1990s with titles like Seasonality of Births in Human Populations, The Effect of Temperature on Human Fertility, and Modeling Seasonality in Fecundability, Conceptions, and Births. Aki and […]

Oooh, it burns me up

If any of you are members of the Marketing Research Association, could you please contact them and ask them to change their position on this issue: I have a feeling they won’t mind if you call them at home. With an autodialer. “Pollsters now must hand-dial cellphones, at great expense,” indeed. It’s that expensive to […]

Better to just not see the sausage get made

Mike Carniello writes: This article in the NYT leads to the full text, in which these statement are buried (no pun intended): What is the probability that two given texts were written by the same author? This was achieved by posing an alternative null hypothesis H0 (“both texts were written by the same author”) and […]

Letters we never finished reading

I got a book in the mail attached to some publicity material that began: Over the last several years, a different kind of science book has found a home on consumer bookshelves. Anchored by meticulous research and impeccable credentials, these books bring hard science to bear on the daily lives of the lay reader; their […]

A day in the life

I like to post approx one item per day on this blog, so when multiple things come up in the same day, I worry about the sustainability of all this. I suppose I could up the posting rate to 2 a day but I think that could be too much of a burden on the […]

Hey pollsters! Poststratify on party ID, or we’re all gonna have to do it for you.

Alan Abramowitz writes: In five days, Clinton’s lead increased from 5 points to 12 points. And Democratic party ID margin increased from 3 points to 10 points. No, I don’t think millions of voters switched to the Democratic party. I think Democrats are were just more likely to respond in that second poll. And, remember, […]

His varying slopes don’t seem to follow a normal distribution

Bruce Doré writes: I have a question about multilevel modeling I’m hoping you can help with. What should one do when random effects coefficients are clearly not normally distributed (i.e., coef(lmer(y~x+(x|id))) )? Is this a sign that the model should be changed? Or can you stick with this model and infer that the assumption of […]

Balancing bias and variance in the design of behavioral studies: The importance of careful measurement in randomized experiments

At Bank Underground: When studying the effects of interventions on individual behavior, the experimental research template is typically: Gather a bunch of people who are willing to participate in an experiment, randomly divide them into two groups, assign one treatment to group A and the other to group B, then measure the outcomes. If you […]

Evil collaboration between Medtronic and FDA

Paul Alper points us to this news article by Jim Spencer and Joe Carlson that has this amazing bit: Medtronic ran a retrospective study of 3,647 Infuse patients from 2006-2008 but shut it down without reporting more than 1,000 “adverse events” to the government within 30 days, as the law required. Medtronic, which acknowledges it […]

Bayesian inference completely solves the multiple comparisons problem

I promised I wouldn’t do any new blogging until January but I’m here at this conference and someone asked me a question about the above slide from my talk. The point of the story in that slide is that flat priors consistently give bad inferences. Or, to put it another way, the routine use of […]

One more thing you don’t have to worry about

Baruch Eitam writes: So I have been convinced by the futility of NHT for my scientific goals and by the futility of of significance testing (in the sense of using p-values as a measure of the strength of evidence against the null). So convinced that I have been teaching this for the last 2 years. […]

On deck this week

Mon: One more thing you don’t have to worry about Tues: Evil collaboration between Medtronic and FDA Wed: His varying slopes don’t seem to follow a normal distribution Thurs: A day in the life Fri: Letters we never finished reading Sat: Better to just not see the sausage get made Sun: Oooh, it burns me […]

Taking Bayesian Inference Seriously [my talk tomorrow at Harvard conference on Big Data]

Mon 22 Aug, 9:50am, at Harvard Science Center Hall A: Taking Bayesian Inference Seriously Over the years I have been moving toward the use of informative priors in more and more of my applications. I will discuss several examples from theory, application, and computing where traditional noninformative priors lead to disaster, but a little bit […]

Kaiser Fung on the ethics of data analysis

Kaiser gave a presentation and he’s sharing the slides with us here. It’s important stuff.

Michael Porter as new pincushion

Some great comments on this post about Ted talk visionary Michael Porter. Most rewarding was this from Howard Edwards: New Zealand seems to score well on his index so perhaps I shouldn’t complain, but Michael Porter was well known in this part of the world 25 years ago when our government commissioned him to write […]

Things that sound good but aren’t quite right: Art and research edition

There are a lot of things you can say that sound very sensible but, upon reflection, are missing something. For example consider this blog comment from Chris G: Years ago I heard someone suggest these three questions for assessing a work of art: 1. What was the artist attempting to do? 2. Were they successful? […]

An ethnographic study of the “open evidential culture” of research psychology

Claude Fischer points me to this paper by David Peterson, “The Baby Factory: Difficult Research Objects, Disciplinary Standards, and the Production of Statistical Significance,” which begins: Science studies scholars have shown that the management of natural complexity in lab settings is accomplished through a mixture of technological standardization and tacit knowledge by lab workers. Yet […]