nhaliday + len:short   131

[0809.5250] The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007
These measures are used for four broad disciplines: natural sciences and engineering, medical fields, social sciences, and the humanities. All these measures converge and show that, contrary to what was reported by Evans, the dispersion of citations is actually increasing.

- natural sciences around 60-70% cited in 2-5 year window
- humanities stands out w/ 10-20% cited (maybe because of focus on books)
study  preprint  science  meta:science  distribution  network-structure  len:short  publishing  density  🔬  info-dynamics  org:mat 
february 2017 by nhaliday
Genetics and educational attainment | npj Science of Learning
Figure 1 is quite good
Sibling Correlations for Behavioral Traits. This figure displays sibling correlations for five traits measured in a large sample of Swedish brother pairs born 1951–1970. All outcomes except years of schooling are measured at conscription, around the age of 18.

correlations for IQ/EA for adoptees are actually nontrivial in adulthood, hmm

Figure 2 has GWAS R^2s through 2016 (in-sample, I guess?)
study  org:nat  biodet  education  methodology  essay  survey  genetics  GWAS  variance-components  init  causation  🌞  metrics  population-genetics  explanation  unit  nibble  len:short  big-picture  behavioral-gen  state-of-art  iq  embodied  correlation  twin-study  sib-study  summary  europe  nordic  data  visualization  s:*  tip-of-tongue  spearhead  bioinformatics 
february 2017 by nhaliday
political analysis | West Hunter
Just to make things clear, most political reporters are morons, nearly as bad as sports reporters. Mostly ugly cheerleaders for their side, rather than analysts. Uninteresting.

how to analyze polls:

Who ever is ahead in the polls at the time of election is extremely likely to win. Talk about how Candidate X would have a ‘difficult path to 270 electoral votes’ when he’s up 2 points (for example), is pretty much horseshit. There are second-order considerations: you get more oomph per voter when the voter is in a small state, and you also want your votes distributed fairly evenly, so that you win states giving you a majority of electoral votes by a little rather than winning states giving you a minority of electoral votes by huge margins. Not that a candidate can do much about this, of course.

When you hear someone say that it’s really 50 state contests [ more if you think about Maine and Nebraska] , so you should pay attention to the state polls, not the national polls: also horseshit. In some sense, it is true – but when your national polls go up, so do your state polls – almost all of them, in practice. On election day, or just before, you want to consider national polls rather than state polls, because they are almost always more recent, therefore more accurate.

When should you trust an outlier poll, rather than the average: when you want to be wrong.

Money doesn’t help much. Political consultants will tell you that it does, but then they get 15% of ad buys.

A decent political reporter would actually go out and talk to people that aren’t exactly like him. Apparently this no longer happens.

All of these rules have exceptions – but if you understand those [rare] exceptions and can apply them, you’re paying too much attention to politics.
thinking  politics  media  data  street-fighting  poll  contrarianism  len:short  west-hunter  objektbuch  metameta  checklists  sampling-bias  outliers  descriptive  social-choice  gilens-page  elections  scitariat  money  null-result  polisci  incentives  stylized-facts  metabuch  chart  top-n  hi-order-bits  track-record  wonkish  data-science  tetlock  meta:prediction  info-foraging  civic  info-dynamics  interests 
september 2016 by nhaliday
My Beautiful Bubble, Bryan Caplan | EconLog | Library of Economics and Liberty
funny rejoinder from Sailer:
Of course, if there were a big war, it would be nice to be defended by all those dreary Americans you despise.

And, the irony is, they'd do it, too, just because you are an American.
reflection  society  community  economics  contrarianism  lifestyle  philosophy  len:short  econotariat  cracker-econ  org:econlib  network-structure  minimalism  -_-  polarization  individualism-collectivism  isteveish  subculture  nationalism-globalism 
september 2016 by nhaliday
Overcoming Bias : Two Kinds Of Status
prestige and dominance

More here. I was skeptical at first, but now am convinced: humans see two kinds of status, and approve of prestige-status much more than domination-status. I’ll have much more to say about this in the coming days, but it is far from clear to me that prestige-status is as much better than domination-status as people seem to think. Efforts to achieve prestige-status also have serious negative side-effects.

Two Ways to the Top: Evidence That Dominance and Prestige Are Distinct Yet Viable Avenues to Social Rank and Influence: https://henrich.fas.harvard.edu/files/henrich/files/cheng_et_al_2013.pdf
Dominance (the use of force and intimidation to induce fear) and Prestige (the sharing of expertise or know-how to gain respect)


According to the model, Dominance initially arose in evolutionary history as a result of agonistic contests for material resources and mates that were common among nonhuman species, but continues to exist in contemporary human societies, largely in the form of psychological intimidation, coercion, and wielded control over costs and benefits (e.g., access to resources, mates, and well-being). In both humans and nonhumans, Dominance hierarchies are thought to emerge to help maintain patterns of submission directed from subordinates to Dominants, thereby minimizing agonistic battles and incurred costs.

In contrast, Prestige is likely unique to humans, because it is thought to have emerged from selection pressures to preferentially attend to and acquire cultural knowledge from highly skilled or successful others, a capacity considered to be less developed in other animals (Boyd & Richerson, 1985; Laland & Galef, 2009). In this view, social learning (i.e., copying others) evolved in humans as a low-cost fitness-maximizing, information-gathering mechanism (Boyd & Richerson, 1985). Once it became adaptive to copy skilled others, a preference for social models with better than average information would have emerged. This would promote competition for access to the highest quality models, and deference toward these models in exchange for copying and learning opportunities. Consequently, selection likely favored Prestige differentiation, with individuals possessing high-quality information or skills elevated to the top of the hierarchy. Meanwhile, other individuals may reach the highest ranks of their group’s hierarchy by wielding threat of force, regardless of the quality of their knowledge or skills. Thus, Dominance and Prestige can be thought of as coexisting avenues to attaining rank and influence within social groups, despite being underpinned by distinct motivations and behavioral patterns, and resulting in distinct patterns of imitation and deference from subordinates.

Importantly, both Dominance and Prestige are best conceptualized as cognitive and behavioral strategies (i.e., suites of subjective feelings, cognitions, motivations, and behavioral patterns that together produce certain outcomes) deployed in certain situations, and can be used (with more or less success) by any individual within a group. They are not types of individuals, or even, necessarily, traits within individuals. Instead, we assume that all situated dyadic relationships contain differential degrees of both Dominance and Prestige, such that each person is simultaneously Dominant and Prestigious to some extent, to some other individual. Thus, it is possible that a high degree of Dominance and a high degree of Prestige may be found within the same individual, and may depend on who is doing the judging. For example, by controlling students’ access to rewards and punishments, school teachers may exert Dominance in their relationships with some students, but simultaneously enjoy Prestige with others, if they are respected and deferred to for their competence and wisdom. Indeed, previous studies have shown that based on both self- and peer ratings, Dominance and Prestige are largely independent (mean r = -.03; Cheng et al., 2010).

Status Hypocrisy: https://www.overcomingbias.com/2017/01/status-hypocrisy.html
Today we tend to say that our leaders have prestige, while their leaders have dominance. That is, their leaders hold power via personal connections and the threat and practice of violence, bribes, sex, gossip, and conformity pressures. Our leaders, instead, mainly just have whatever abilities follow from our deepest respect and admiration regarding their wisdom and efforts on serious topics that matter for us all. Their leaders more seek power, while ours more have leadership thrust upon them. Because of this us/them split, we tend to try to use persuasion on us, but force on them, when seeking to to change behaviors.


Clearly, while there is some fact of the matter about how much a person gains their status via licit or illicit means, there is also a lot of impression management going on. We like to give others the impression that we personally mainly want prestige in ourselves and our associates, and that we only grant others status via the prestige they have earned. But let me suggest that, compared to this ideal, we actually want more dominance in ourselves and our associates than we like to admit, and we submit more often to dominance.

Cads, Dads, Doms: https://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/07/cads-dads-doms.html
"The proper dichotomy is not “virile vs. wimpy” as has been supposed, but “exciting vs. drab,” with the former having the two distinct sub-groups “macho man vs. pretty boy.” Another way to see that this is the right dichotomy is to look around the world: wherever girls really dig macho men, they also dig the peacocky musician type too, finding safe guys a bit boring. And conversely, where devoted dads do the best, it’s more difficult for macho men or in-town-for-a-day rockstars to make out like bandits. …

Whatever it is about high-pathogen-load areas that selects for greater polygynous behavior … will result in an increase in both gorilla-like and peacock-like males, since they’re two viable ways to pursue a polygynous mating strategy."

This fits with there being two kinds of status: dominance and prestige. Macho men, such as CEOs and athletes, have dominance, while musicians and artists have prestige. But women seek both short and long term mates. Since both kinds of status suggest good genes, both attract women seeking short term mates. This happens more when women are younger and richer, and when there is more disease. Foragers pretend they don’t respect dominance as much as they do, so prestigious men get more overt attention, while dominant men get more covert attention.

Women seeking long term mates also consider a man’s ability to supply resources, and may settle for poorer genes to get more resources. Dominant men tend to have more resources than prestigious men, so such men are more likely to fill both roles, being long term mates for some women and short term mates for others. Men who can offer only prestige must accept worse long term mates, while men who can offer only resources must accept few short term mates. Those low in prestige, resources, or dominance must accept no mates. A man who had prestige, dominance, and resources would get the best short and long term mates – what men are these?

Stories are biased toward dramatic events, and so are biased toward events with risky men; it is harder to tell a good story about the attraction of a resource-rich man. So stories naturally encourage short term mating. Shouldn’t this make long-term mates wary of strong mate attraction to dramatic stories?

Woman want three things: someone to fight for them (the Warrior), someone to provide for them (the Tycoon) and someone to excite their emotions or entertain them (the Wizard).

In this context,

Dad= Tycoon
Cad= Wizard

To repeat:

Dom (Cocky)+ Dad (Generous) + Cad (Exciting/Funny) = Laid

There is an old distinction between "proximate" and "ultimate" causes. Evolution is an ultimate cause, physiology (and psychology, here) is a proximate cause. The flower bends to follow the sun because it gathers more light that way, but the immediate mechanism of the bending involves hormones called auxins. I see a lot of speculation about, say, sexual cognitive dimorphism whose ultimate cause is evolutionary, but not so much speculation about the proximate cause - the "how" of the difference, rather than the "why". And here I think a visit to an older mode of explanation like Marsden's - one which is psychological rather than genetic - can sensitize us to the fact that the proximate causes of a behavioral tendency need not be a straightforward matter of being hardwired differently.

This leads to my second point, which is just that we should remember that human beings actually possess consciousness. This means not only that the proximate cause of a behavior may deeply involve subjectivity, self-awareness, and an existential situation. It also means that all of these propositions about what people do are susceptible to change once they have been spelled out and become part of the culture. It is rather like the stock market: once everyone knows (or believes) something, then that information provides no advantage, creating an incentive for novelty.

Finally, the consequences of new beliefs about the how and the why of human nature and human behavior. Right or wrong, theories already begin to have consequences once they are taken up and incorporated into subjectivity. We really need a new Foucault to take on this topic.

The Economics of Social Status: http://www.meltingasphalt.com/the-economics-of-social-status/
Prestige vs. dominance. Joseph Henrich (of WEIRD fame) distinguishes two types of status. Prestige is the kind of status we get from being an impressive human specimen (think Meryl Streep), and it's governed by our 'approach' instincts. Dominance, on the other hand, is … [more]
things  status  hanson  thinking  comparison  len:short  anthropology  farmers-and-foragers  phalanges  ratty  duty  power  humility  hypocrisy  hari-seldon  multi  sex  gender  signaling  🐝  tradeoffs  evopsych  insight  models  sexuality  gender-diff  chart  postrat  yvain  ssc  simler  critique  essay  debate  paying-rent  gedanken  empirical  operational  vague  info-dynamics  len:long  community  henrich  long-short-run  rhetoric  contrarianism  coordination  social-structure  hidden-motives  politics  2016-election  rationality  links  study  summary  list  hive-mind  speculation  coalitions  values  🤖  metabuch  envy  universalism-particularism  egalitarianism-hierarchy  s-factor  unintended-consequences  tribalism  group-selection  justice  inequality  competition  cultural-dynamics  peace-violence  ranking  machiavelli  authoritarianism  strategy  tactics  organizing  leadership  management  n-factor  duplication  thiel  volo-avolo  todo  technocracy  rent-seeking  incentives  econotariat  marginal-rev  civilization  rot  gibbon 
september 2016 by nhaliday
Overcoming Bias : We Need The Very Rich
Why look at years-to-payback instead of return on investment? A new NBER paper on private vs. public firms makes the answer clear. Unless project gains can be very clearly proven to analysts, or perhaps so small and numerous to allow averaging over them, public firms are basically incapable of taking a loss on earnings this quarter in order to make gains several years later, no matter how big those gains. CEOs are strongly tempted to instead please analysts by grabbing higher short-term quarterly earnings. So we need the very rich to make long-term investments.
hanson  study  economics  micro  investing  finance  econometrics  business  arbitrage  len:short  efficiency  🎩  market-failure  pre-2013  long-short-run  industrial-org  entrepreneurialism  wealth  chart  ratty 
september 2016 by nhaliday
Shut Up And Guess - Less Wrong
At what confidence level do you guess? At what confidence level do you answer "don't know"?

I took several of these tests last month, and the first thing I did was some quick mental calculations. If I have zero knowledge of a question, my expected gain from answering is 50% probability of earning one point and 50% probability of losing one half point. Therefore, my expected gain from answering a question is .5(1)-.5(.5)= +.25 points. Compare this to an expected gain of zero from not answering the question at all. Therefore, I ought to guess on every question, even if I have zero knowledge. If I have some inkling, well, that's even better.

You look disappointed. This isn't a very exciting application of arcane Less Wrong knowledge. Anyone with basic math skills should be able to calculate that out, right?

I attend a pretty good university, and I'm in a postgraduate class where most of us have at least a bachelor's degree in a hard science, and a few have master's degrees. And yet, talking to my classmates in the cafeteria after the first test was finished, I started to realize I was the only person in the class who hadn't answered "don't know" to any questions.

even more interesting stories in the comments
street-fighting  lesswrong  yvain  essay  rationality  regularizer  len:short  ratty  stories  higher-ed  education  decision-theory  frontier  thinking  spock  biases  pre-2013  low-hanging  decision-making  mental-math  bounded-cognition  nitty-gritty  paying-rent  info-dynamics  analytical-holistic  quantitative-qualitative 
september 2016 by nhaliday
« earlier      
per page:    204080120160

bundles : props

related tags

-_-  2016-election  :/  aaronson  abortion-contraception-embryo  absolute-relative  academia  accelerationism  accuracy  acm  acmtariat  advice  aesthetics  age-generation  aging  agriculture  ai  ai-control  akrasia  albion  algorithms  alignment  alt-inst  analysis  analytical-holistic  anglosphere  announcement  anomie  anonymity  anthropic  anthropology  antiquity  aphorism  apollonian-dionysian  arbitrage  archaeology  art  article  ascetic  asia  assortative-mating  atoms  authoritarianism  axelrod  axioms  backup  bangbang  barons  beauty  behavioral-gen  being-right  benevolence  best-practices  betting  biases  big-peeps  big-picture  bio  biodet  bioinformatics  biophysical-econ  biotech  blowhards  books  bootstraps  bounded-cognition  branches  britain  broad-econ  business  c:*  cancer  candidate-gene  capitalism  carcinisation  career  carmack  cartoons  causation  chapman  chart  checklists  china  civic  civil-liberty  civilization  clarity  class  class-warfare  classic  clever-rats  climate-change  clown-world  coalitions  cocktail  cog-psych  comedy  coming-apart  commentary  community  comparison  compensation  competition  complement-substitute  complex-systems  composition-decomposition  computation  concept  conceptual-vocab  concurrency  confounding  confusion  consumerism  contracts  contrarianism  convexity-curvature  cooking  cool  cooperate-defect  coordination  core-rats  corporation  correlation  corruption  cost-benefit  cracker-econ  creative  crime  CRISPR  critique  crooked  crypto  cultural-dynamics  culture  culture-war  current-events  cycles  cynicism-idealism  dan-luu  dark-arts  data  data-science  dataviz  death  debate  debt  decentralized  decision-making  decision-theory  deep-materialism  defense  degrees-of-freedom  democracy  demographic-transition  demographics  density  descriptive  design  detail-architecture  developing-world  developmental  diet  dignity  diogenes  direct-indirect  discipline  disease  distributed  distribution  divergence  domestication  drama  drugs  duplication  duty  dysgenics  early-modern  econometrics  economics  econotariat  eden  eden-heaven  education  EEA  effect-size  effective-altruism  efficiency  egalitarianism-hierarchy  ego-depletion  eh  elections  elite  embedded-cognition  embodied  embodied-street-fighting  emotion  empirical  ems  endo-exo  ends-means  energy-resources  engineering  enhancement  enlightenment-renaissance-restoration-reformation  entertainment  entrepreneurialism  environment  environmental-effects  envy  epidemiology  epigenetics  epistemic  error  essay  ethics  ethnocentrism  ethnography  europe  evidence-based  evolution  evopsych  expert  expert-experience  explanans  explanation  exploratory  expression-survival  externalities  extratricky  faq  farmers-and-foragers  fashun  FDA  fermi  fertility  fiction  field-study  finance  fluid  flux-stasis  flynn  focus  food  formal-methods  formal-values  frontier  functional  futurism  games  gavisti  gedanken  gelman  gender  gender-diff  genetic-load  genetics  genomics  gibbon  gilens-page  gnon  gnxp  god-man-beast-victim  gotchas  government  grad-school  gray-econ  greg-egan  gregory-clark  group-selection  growth  growth-econ  gtd  GWAS  habit  hanson  hard-tech  hardware  hari-seldon  health  healthcare  henrich  heterodox  hi-order-bits  hidden-motives  higher-ed  history  hive-mind  hmm  hn  homepage  homo-hetero  honor  horror  housing  hsu  human-capital  human-ml  humanity  humility  hypocrisy  ideas  identity  identity-politics  ideology  idk  illusion  immune  impact  impetus  impro  incentives  india  individualism-collectivism  industrial-org  industrial-revolution  inequality  info-dynamics  info-foraging  infrastructure  init  innovation  input-output  insight  institutions  integrity  intelligence  interdisciplinary  interests  internet  interpretation  intervention  intricacy  intuition  investing  iq  is-ought  isteveish  iteration-recursion  journos-pundits  judaism  justice  knowledge  kumbaya-kult  labor  land  language  large-factor  law  leadership  left-wing  legacy  legibility  len:long  len:short  lesswrong  letters  leviathan  life-history  lifehack  lifestyle  linear-models  linearity  links  list  literature  lived-experience  local-global  lol  long-short-run  long-term  longevity  low-hanging  lurid  machiavelli  machine-learning  macro  magnitude  malaise  malthus  management  map-territory  marginal  marginal-rev  market-failure  markets  martial  matching  matrix-factorization  meaningness  measure  measurement  media  medicine  MENA  mental-math  meta-analysis  meta:medicine  meta:prediction  meta:research  meta:rhetoric  meta:science  meta:war  metabuch  metameta  methodology  metrics  micro  microfic  microfoundations  minimalism  missing-heritability  mobility  model-class  models  modernity  mokyr-allen-mccloskey  moloch  monetary-fiscal  money  morality  mostly-modern  multi  murray  musk  mutation  mystic  n-factor  narrative  nascent-state  nationalism-globalism  near-far  network-structure  neuro  neuro-nitgrit  neurons  new-religion  news  nibble  nihil  nitty-gritty  nl-and-so-can-you  nlp  noahpinion  nonlinearity  nootropics  nordic  novelty  null-result  number  nutrition  obesity  objektbuch  occam  occident  oly  oly-programming  open-closed  operational  optimate  optimism  order-disorder  org:anglo  org:biz  org:bleg  org:bv  org:data  org:econlib  org:edu  org:foreign  org:health  org:junk  org:lite  org:mag  org:mat  org:med  org:nat  org:ngo  org:popup  org:rec  org:sci  organizing  orient  outliers  p:null  parable  parasites-microbiome  parenting  parsimony  patience  paying-rent  peace-violence  personality  persuasion  perturbation  pessimism  phalanges  pharma  philosophy  phys-energy  physics  planning  play  plots  pls  plt  poast  polarization  policy  polis  polisci  political-econ  politics  poll  pop-diff  popsci  population  population-genetics  postrat  power  power-law  pragmatic  pre-2013  prediction  prediction-markets  preference-falsification  preprint  primitivism  priors-posteriors  privacy  pro-rata  problem-solving  product-management  productivity  programming  property-rights  proposal  protocol  pseudoE  psych-architecture  psychedelics  psychiatry  psychology  psychometrics  public-health  publishing  puzzles  python  QTL  quantitative-qualitative  questions  quotes  race  random  randy-ayndy  ranking  rant  rat-pack  rationality  ratty  realness  reason  recommendations  reddit  redistribution  reflection  regional-scatter-plots  regularizer  regulation  reinforcement  religion  rent-seeking  replication  research  research-program  review  revolution  rhetoric  right-wing  risk  ritual  roots  rot  s-factor  s:*  s:**  sampling-bias  sanctity-degradation  sapiens  scale  scaling-up  schelling  science  scifi-fantasy  scitariat  security  self-control  self-interest  sex  sexuality  shipping  sib-study  signal-noise  signaling  simler  singularity  sinosphere  skunkworks  slippery-slope  social  social-capital  social-choice  social-norms  social-psych  social-structure  sociality  society  sociology  socs-and-mops  software  space  spearhead  speculation  speedometer  spock  spoiler  sports  ssc  stagnation  stamina  startups  state-of-art  stats  status  stories  strategy  straussian  street-fighting  stress  structure  study  stylized-facts  subculture  success  summary  summer-2015  supply-demand  survey  synthesis  system-design  systematic-ad-hoc  szabo  tactics  tails  taubes-guyenet  tcstariat  teaching  tech  technocracy  technology  techtariat  telos-atelos  temperature  tetlock  the-bones  the-devil  the-great-west-whale  the-monster  the-world-is-just-atoms  theory-of-mind  theos  thermo  thick-thin  thiel  things  thinking  threat-modeling  time  time-use  tip-of-tongue  todo  top-n  toxoplasmosis  traces  track-record  trade  tradeoffs  tradition  trends  tribalism  trivia  troll  trump  truth  tutoring  tv  twin-study  twitter  unaffiliated  unintended-consequences  unit  universalism-particularism  urban  urban-rural  usa  vague  values  vampire-squid  variance-components  vgr  virtu  visualization  vitality  volo-avolo  walls  war  water  wealth  wealth-of-nations  web  weird-sun  west-hunter  westminster  whiggish-hegelian  winner-take-all  wire-guided  within-without  wonkish  workflow  working-stiff  world  writing  X-not-about-Y  xenobio  yarvin  yc  yvain  zeitgeist  zero-positive-sum  🌞  🎩  🐝  🐸  👽  🔬  🖥  🤖  🦀  🦉 

Copy this bookmark: