Comments on: sometimes things just don’t add up

By: Jersey

Jersey — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 08:08:59 +0000

Blaming doesn’t help solve the problem. We should stop blaming who caused the problems of the sub-continent and just freaking solve it.

This is why most of our major world problems haven’t been solved yet — old rich men just chatting and arguing over the cause rather than putting their heads and any wisdom they have together to fix the problem.

By: Peter

Peter — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 18:58:24 +0000

Sometimes I find myself looking just at a new.

By: Kieran

Kieran — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 18:08:14 +0000

I slip up on datum-is/data-are regularly. It’s like having to remember an irregular participle. People using data as a singular irked a colleague at Wisconsin so much he had a note about it as his signature file for well over a year.

Sociologists of all people should be aware that prescriptivism in grammar is a losing battle. Did your colleague also insist that “news” takes a plural?

By: olderwoman

olderwoman — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 17:48:30 +0000

Data points are not just individuals. I’m working with states. Yes, I did mean that. If you have only two cases and five theories about how they are different, you have too little data to resolve the issue. What I meant by qualitative data points is that qualitative researchers did into the details of orders of events, what people said their motives or ideas were, etc. that provide more information relevant to adjudicating among explanations. Stuff that does not line up as variables for a regression, but still represents additional data. I stick to my guns here, if you have more explanatory factors than bits of data, you don’t have enough information to resolve the problem.

Re sing vs plural, I use plural, but some sources now are calling that an archaism.

By: jeremy

jeremy — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 17:38:28 +0000

By: justin kace

justin kace — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 17:34:16 +0000

Your data is from individuals

I was hoping at least researchers would avoid referring to “data” in singular.

By: shakha

shakha — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 16:40:56 +0000

Quoting olderwoman, “If you have more possible explanations than data points, you can’t solve the problem.”

Is the implication of this:

1.) Your data is from individuals
2.) Assume agency (people can be explanations of their own outcomes)
3.) Therefore, in regression you can’t ever really solve a problem if you mobilize any explanation outside of individuals (if you assume agency)? Your sample size is N, given (2) you assume N explanations. I know this is ridiculous. I don’t think I’ve been incredibly clever here (taking down regression in one simple swoop). It’s just that it never occurred to me before. I blame my methods teacher.

By: Radio Free Newport

Radio Free Newport — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 16:39:55 +0000

I would’ve been tempted to lapse into my best Matthew-McConaughey-in-Dazed-and-Confused voice and answer, “Dude, I would get SO wasted.” Stupid questions deserve stupid answers, interview context or not.

By: ktel

ktel — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 15:32:44 +0000

jlena: Worse would be “there is no such thing as empathy for other professionals.” At least with “suddenly removed,” there’s a chance it may come back.

By: jlena

jlena — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 13:47:46 +0000

You guys are going to scare the kids. They will wake up this morning to discover that professional empathy has been SUDDENLY REMOVED from the world.

Hrm, maybe I mean “empathy for other professionals.”

Coffee.