You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #35: So many choices, so little time... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
Febble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-02-05 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. So many choices, so little time...
Exactly, it is not engineering.

I think this is at the bottom of my differences with Bruce, who is an engineer.

I am a behavioural scientist, and noise in human behaviour does not behave in the way that it does in engineering.

A behavioural scientis is usually very pleased with an R squared of even 30%. We know we are lucky to model a fraction of the variance in our data.

In my paper I postulate high degrees of variance for response rates. I believe these are justified by the absolute WPE values given in the E-M report. If anything my noise levels are too low. And yet it leaves insufficient power to detect the pattern noted by USCV as "fraudulent".

But we know, as I have said countless times, elsewhere and on this site in the past couple of days, that the overstatement of the Kerry vote was not noise. It was not within the MoE. It was not sampling error. You yourself have computed the probability of the Kerry overstatement being due to chance. I'd cap your estimates - using the WPE alone, I got something like 1 in 9 billion.

It was not due to chance. It was due to something else. Could have been fraud. Could have been differential non-response.

But whatever it had would have had VARIANCE. It is the amount of variance assumed in this mystery factor, this latent variable, that is at the root of the disagreement between USCV and me. And I am fairly confident, because I am not guessing, that my noise estimates are nearer the mark.

Because human error, and also human fraud, are noisy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC