Blog · corpus.blog/blogs/statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/posts
Andrew Gelman
statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu
2019
9 Dec 2019
6 Dec 2019
“Pfizer had clues its blockbuster drug could prevent Alzheimer’s. Why didn’t it tell the world?”original ↗
5 Dec 2019
“Would Republicans pay a price if they vote to impeach the president? Here’s what we know from 1974.”original ↗
4 Dec 2019
3 Dec 2019
1 Dec 2019
30 Nov 2019
When speculating about causes of trends in mortality rates: (a) make sure that what you’re trying to explain has actually been happening, and (b) be clear where your data end and your speculations begin.original ↗
30 Nov 2019
In short, adding more animals to your experiment is fine. The problem is in using statistical significance to make decisions about what to conclude from your data.original ↗
29 Nov 2019
Controversies in vaping statistics, leading to a general discussion of dispute resolution in scienceoriginal ↗
27 Nov 2019
“Why We Sleep” update: some thoughts while we wait for Matthew Walker to respond to Alexey Guzey’s criticismsoriginal ↗
24 Nov 2019
“Whether something is statistically significant is itself a very random feature of data, so in this case you’re essentially outsourcing your modeling decision to a random number”original ↗
24 Nov 2019
No, Bayes does not like Mayor Pete. (Pitfalls of using implied betting market odds to estimate electability.)original ↗
23 Nov 2019
23 Nov 2019
Econometrics postdoc and computational statistics postdoc openings here in the Stan group at Columbiaoriginal ↗
22 Nov 2019
What does a “statistically significant difference in mortality rates” mean when you’re trying to decide where to send your kid for heart surgery?original ↗
21 Nov 2019
19 Nov 2019
18 Nov 2019
In research as in negotiation: Be willing to walk away, don’t paint yourself into a corner, leave no hostages to fortuneoriginal ↗
17 Nov 2019
Zombie semantics spread in the hope of keeping most on the same low road you are comfortable with now: Delaying the hardship of learning better methodology.original ↗
15 Nov 2019
I (inadvertently) misrepresented others’ research in a way that made my story sound better.original ↗
14 Nov 2019
14 Nov 2019
14 Nov 2019
Call for Paper proposals for the American Political Science Association: Symposium on Forecasting the 2020 American National Electionsoriginal ↗
14 Nov 2019
Instead of replicating studies with problems, let’s replicate the good studies. (Consider replication as an honor, not an attack.)original ↗
13 Nov 2019
Participate in Brazilian Reproducibility Initiative—even if you don’t live in South America!original ↗
12 Nov 2019
11 Nov 2019
10 Nov 2019
Battle for the headline: Hype and the effect of statistical significance on the ability of journalists to engage in critical thinkingoriginal ↗
8 Nov 2019
7 Nov 2019
7 Nov 2019
Have prices have risen more quickly for people at the bottom of the income distribution than for those at the top? Lefty window-breakers wait impatiently while economists struggle to resolve this dispute.original ↗
6 Nov 2019
Filling/emptying the half empty/full glass of profitable science: Different views on retiring versus retaining thresholds for statistical significance.original ↗
4 Nov 2019
“The paper has been blind peer-reviewed and published in a highly reputable journal, which is the gold standard in scientific corroboration. Thus, all protocol was followed to the letter and the work is officially supported.”original ↗
4 Nov 2019
The climate economics echo chamber: Gremlins and the people (including a Nobel prize winner) who support themoriginal ↗
1 Nov 2019
31 Oct 2019
31 Oct 2019
31 Oct 2019
Non-randomly missing data is hard, or why weights won’t solve your survey problems and you need to think generativelyoriginal ↗
29 Oct 2019
28 Oct 2019
27 Oct 2019
“Any research object with a strong and obvious series of inconsistencies may be deemed too inaccurate to trust, irrespective of their source. In other words, the description of inconsistency makes no presumption about the source of that inconsistency.”original ↗
26 Oct 2019
25 Oct 2019
Givewell is hiring; wants someone to help figure out how to give well; Bayesian methods may be relevant hereoriginal ↗
25 Oct 2019
25 Oct 2019
The devil’s in the details…and also in the broad strokes. Is this study ridiculous, or am I badly misjudging it?original ↗
24 Oct 2019
24 Oct 2019
22 Oct 2019
Bayesian analysis of data collected sequentially: it’s easy, just include as predictors in the model any variables that go into the stopping rule.original ↗
22 Oct 2019
22 Oct 2019
22 Oct 2019
“Starting at the beginning again can be exhausting and stressful. But, opportunities are finally coming into focus . . .”original ↗
21 Oct 2019
20 Oct 2019
19 Oct 2019
The real lesson learned from those academic hoaxes: a key part of getting a paper published in a scholarly journal is to be able to follow the conventions of the journal. And some people happen to be good at that, irrespective of the content of the papers being submitted.original ↗
18 Oct 2019
16 Oct 2019
15 Oct 2019