gwern comments on How confident are you in the Atomic Theory of Matter? - Less Wrong

0 Post author: DataPacRat 19 January 2013 08:39PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (80)

Comments (80)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gwern 29 June 2013 09:01:16PM 0 points [-]

(For this comment, I searched for "smoking IQ conscientiousness correlation" without the quotes, to give an example.) Then I just reuse those numbers for whatever analysis I'd like to do. This is risky because two variables can correlate differently in different populations. To reduce that risk I try to use the estimate from the population most similar to the population I have in mind, or I try estimating the correlation myself in a public use dataset that happens to include both variables and the population I want.

You never try to meta-analyze them with perhaps a state or country moderator?

Comment author: satt 04 July 2013 08:43:11PM *  0 points [-]

You never try to meta-analyze them with perhaps a state or country moderator?

I misunderstood you again; for some reason I got it into my head that you were asking about getting a point estimate of a secondary correlation that enters (as a nuisance parameter) into a meta-analysis of some primary quantity.

Yeah, if I were interested in a population-level correlation in its own right I might of course try meta-analyzing it with moderators like state or country.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit