Blog · corpus.blog/blogs/statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/posts
Andrew Gelman
statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu
2025
11 Feb 2025
Talks Feb 11 (Princeton) and Feb 18 (Stanford) on benchmarking human decisions from predictionsoriginal ↗
10 Feb 2025
What is the correct value of X in the sentence, “The t test is the Xth most important statistical method in science”?original ↗
10 Feb 2025
“Why are places like Stanford and Johns Hopkins hosting gatherings of well-known coronavirus cranks?”original ↗
9 Feb 2025
If there really is more fraud being done by prominent scientists than there was in the past, why? Here’s a theory:original ↗
8 Feb 2025
“Deep fakes threaten truth everywhere, but particularly in science. Content provenance means data provenance, information provenance and knowledge provenance. It is the chain of provenance that will establish what is truth.”original ↗
7 Feb 2025
“Florida man eats diet of butter, cheese, beef; cholesterol oozes from his body”: How much am I to blame for this?original ↗
6 Feb 2025
31 Jan 2025
29 Jan 2025
In decreasing order of importance: (1) The error, (2) How the error persisted, (3) The research misconduct, (4) Who did it.original ↗
29 Jan 2025
28 Jan 2025
27 Jan 2025
Reading the referee reports of that retracted paper by the science reformers: A peek behind the curtainoriginal ↗
26 Jan 2025
25 Jan 2025
When estimating a treatment effect with a cluster design, you need to include varying slopes, even if the fit gives warning messages.original ↗
23 Jan 2025
19 Jan 2025
Where should we publish our paper, “Statistical graphics and comics: Parallel histories of visual storytelling”?original ↗
18 Jan 2025
Why I like preregistration (and it’s not about p-hacking). When done right, it unifies the substance of science with the scientific method.original ↗
16 Jan 2025
“The terror among academics on the covid origins issue is like nothing we’ve ever seen before”original ↗
15 Jan 2025
The theory crisis in physics compared to the replication crisis in social science: Two different opinion-field inversions that differ in some important waysoriginal ↗
13 Jan 2025
10 Jan 2025
10 Jan 2025
Junk science becomes more professionalized. Meanwhile, conspiracy theories are being more associated with the center-right and right, politically. How does all this fit together? I’m not sure.original ↗
8 Jan 2025
Truth is more realistic than fiction, and what this tells us about odious thought experimentsoriginal ↗
7 Jan 2025
7 Jan 2025
2 Jan 2025
1 Jan 2025
2024
Calibration “resolves” epistemic uncertainty by giving predictions that are indistinguishable from the true probabilities. Why is this still unsatisfying?original ↗
31 Dec 2024
31 Dec 2024
30 Dec 2024
Sorry, NYT, but, yes, “Equidistant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis” was junk scienceoriginal ↗
29 Dec 2024
Bayesian inference (and mathematical reasoning more generally) isn’t just about getting the answer; it’s also about clarifying the mapping from assumptions to inference to decision.original ↗
28 Dec 2024
Addressing legitimate counterarguments in a scientific review: The challenge of being an insideroriginal ↗
24 Dec 2024
Stanford medical school professor misrepresents what I wrote (but I kind of understand where he’s coming from)original ↗
22 Dec 2024
21 Dec 2024
He took public funds and falsified his data. Are they gonna make him pay back the $19 million?original ↗
18 Dec 2024
The most interesting part of the story is that the publisher went through all these steps of reviewing and revising. If they just want to make money by publishing crap, why bother engaging outside reviewers at all?original ↗
14 Dec 2024
“How a simple math error sparked a panic about black plastic kitchen utensils”: Does it matter when an estimate is off by a factor of 10?original ↗
13 Dec 2024
It’s Harvard time, baby: “Kerfuffle” is what you call it when you completely botched your data but you don’t want to change your conclusions.original ↗
12 Dec 2024
Answering two questions, one about Bayesian post-selection inference and one about prior and posterior predictive checksoriginal ↗
11 Dec 2024
Why am I willing to bet you $100-1000 there will be a Nobel Prize for Adaptive Experimentation in the next 40 years?original ↗
10 Dec 2024
Bias remaining after adjusting for pre-treatment variables. Also the challenges of learning through experimentation.original ↗
10 Dec 2024
9 Dec 2024
“I work in a biology lab . . . My PI proposed a statistical test that I think is nonsense. . .”original ↗
8 Dec 2024
“Of course, this could conceivably be a case of near unbelievable luck: A flawed analysis based on wrong assumptions gave an unusually large causal effect estimate – but the misguided result just happened to be correct. We can imagine how the research team huddled nervously around the computer terminal biting their nails and silently praying as they executed their updated Stata code, only to erupt in joy and celebration as the results appeared on screen and revealed they were right all along. .original ↗
7 Dec 2024
5 Dec 2024
Credit where due to NPR regarding science data fraud, and here’s how they can do even betteroriginal ↗
4 Dec 2024
Understanding p-values: Different interpretations can be thought of not as different “philosophies” but as different forms of averaging.original ↗
2 Dec 2024
Here’s my excuse for using obsolete, sub-optimal, or inadequate statistical methods or using a method irresponsibly.original ↗
30 Nov 2024
29 Nov 2024