Showing posts with label Bad Science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bad Science. Show all posts

Thursday, February 26, 2015

Links


  1. Deevy Bishop: Editors behaving badly?. It starts with this (and goes down from there!):

    ... I found that for 32 papers co-authored by Matson in this journal between 2010 and 2014 for which the information was available, the median lag from a paper being received and it being accepted was one day.

  2. Scott Burns in Dallas Morning News: Tortured data will confess to anything. Mentions Uri Simonsohn and p-hacking. And, of course, torture of data.

Sunday, February 02, 2014

Links


  1. Sendhil Mullainathan in NYTimes: Get Some Sleep, and Wake Up the G.D.P.. A great essay on the economic consequences of (lack of) sleep; along the way, we get this about the role of technology:

    Technology is an obvious culprit here. Web searching and cellphone use both flourish in the wee hours. Before the dawn of the web, I would stay up watching television. But there is something soporific about television: I would often nod off. Not so when I’m online. As technologies expand, these problems may only worsen.

  2. Andrew Anthony in The Guardian: The British amateur who debunked the mathematics of happiness.

  3. Ross Pomeroy in Real Clear Science has an example each for scientific articles with the shortest editorial, the shortest abstract, and the shortest paper. I knew about the last one, but the other two are pretty good, too. The one with the shortest abstract has an author from IIT-K.

  4. SMBC on Gay Sex and Bad Weather.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

IQ, Richwine, Harvard


The Richwine affair has generated some fantastic commentary not just on the man's Harvard PhD thesis, but on the broader topic of "IQ and Race". Some links:

  1. Ta-Nehisi Coates in The Atlantic: The Dark Art of Racecraft.

  2. Will Wilkinson in The Economist: The Richwine Affair.

  3. Diego von Vacano at the Monkey Cage: IQ and the Nativist Movement.

  4. Zack Beauchamp in Think Progress: The Inside Story of The Harvard Dissertation That Became Too Racist For Heritage.

    [Update: Jason Richwine Responds On Race, IQ, And His Dissertation, and Beauchamp's reply.]

Friday, April 26, 2013

Reinhart and Rogoff Get the Colbert Treatment


Watch:

The follow-up segment has Stephen Colbert interviewing Thomas Herndon, the UMass econ grad student whose term paper on replicating R&R eventually led to the once-influential paper's unraveling.

Saturday, April 20, 2013

A grad student's term paper


A great story from Reuters: How a student took on eminent economists on debt issue - and won. The student is Thomas Herndon, in the UMass grad program in economics. This thing is buried deep inside the report, but worth highlighting:

Herndon's paper began life as a replication exercise for a term paper in a graduate econometrics class.

A couple of fun links:

  1. Kieran Healy: New Tools for Reproducible Research [a nifty infographic]

  2. In the comments section, we find a link to EuSpRIG, The European Spreadsheet Risks Interest Group -- with its own annual conference. Its website has a page devoted to spreadsheet horror stories. The RR paper hasn't made it to this page so far, though.