Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

The Limits of Empiricism
Two interesting reviews today: David Leonhardt on Ian Ayres, and Daniel Davies on Steven Levitt and Roland Fryer. There's a meme catching hold – think Freakonomics and Moneyball – which says that rigorous empirical analysis can reveal otherwise-unobtainable insights. But these reviews, along with Davies's latest Freakonomics review (part four of a long, wonderful, and hilariously delayed series) constitute a rather interesting countermeme.
The problem is that attempts at rigorous empirical analysis have long since eclipsed the number of empirically-rigorous datasets available. And so you end up with Levitt and Fryer running regression analyses on a KKK dataset which is dominated by Pennsylvania and Ohio, or with Ayres gushing about call-center call times on the basis of some gushing coverage in a back-issue of Fast Company.
As Davies points out in his Freakonomics review, insofar as economics works it's largely because a lot of very smart people spent a great deal of time working out how to generate reliable statistics; and also because whenever someone does any kind of economics research, you can be sure that they're using the same statistics as everybody else. Similarly, insofar as Moneyball worked, that was probably due to the fact that baseball is one of the few other places where you can find a set of universally-accepted and exhaustive statistics. But when you start looking at phone-call durations or KKK membership, you've moved a very long way into much squishier territory.






