« NAFTA and agriculture | Main | The Trump wall keeps getting shorter, another guide for New Yorkers »

March 20, 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Silly professor! The publication of the papers of which you speak is being suppressed by the Atlanteans (or the neo-Victorians, I can't remember which).

From where would the selection bias originate. The authors who submit only studies that find a significant finding? The journals that have a bias towards showing value in social sciences and prefer significant results? I've noticed clustering in social sciences but I'm curious as to plausible causes.

It's often called the "file-drawer effect." I think both authors and journals can be a source of it. Some journals have a blanket policy of not publishing negative results.

My favourite example is that in the Eastern US, Democrats do better along what was the coastline of North America in the Cretaceous.

aka the Cotton Belt?

Not the whole Cotton Belt, just a strip inside it: http://www.deepseanews.com/2012/06/how-presidential-elections-are-impacted-by-a-100-million-year-old-coastline/

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)