[D] What is in your opinion an underrated Statistical method that should be used more often? from statistics
Plotting the data and inspecting it visually. Should be done every time if possible before doing any analyses.
Yeah fam. Visualise it. Not visualising is like a doctor who doesn’t read your notes.
LCA, LPA, and LTA are all underutilized. I think the perception is that they’re no different than cluster analysis, so why not use the easier method (like k means cluster analysis). I’ve seen so many people conflate IRT and CFA with them as well. I think a general lack of understanding about the approach is definitely a contributing factor.
Thinking about and modeling the generative process of your data.
coarsened exact matching for causal inference.
Came to see this
The population of the U.S. on April 1, 2000 was 281,421,906
The nation’s population was 328,239,523 in 2019, growing by 0.5% between 2018 and 2019, or 1,552,022 people.
Labor force participation rate
January 2000 – 67.3
January 2019 – 63.2
Housing units (thousands of units)
April 1, 2000 – 116,047
October 1, 2019 – 140,074
2000 – $5.15
2019 – $7.25
Federal Debt: Total Public Debt as Percent of Gross Domestic Product
Q1 2000 – 57.72
Q1 2019 – 104.40
The first problem with understanding crime is that measuring it is harder than it sounds. The Department of Justice approaches the problem in two ways. The F.B.I.’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program, or U.C.R., solicits data from about twenty thousand law-enforcement agencies around the country. Simultaneously, the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey, or N.C.V.S., interviews about a hundred and fifty thousand nationally representative citizens, asking them whether they have been victims of a crime.
Both datasets have problems. An obvious one is that there’s no consensus about what counts as criminal activity. In some jurisdictions, only offenses worthy of incarceration are considered crimes. In others, fined infractions also count. (Is speeding a crime? What about manspreading, for which one can be fined seventy-five dollars in Los Angeles?) Because the U.C.R. draws its data from investigators, and the N.C.V.S. relies on victims, they can present starkly different pictures of crime. According to the U.C.R., the incidence of rape nearly doubled from 1973 to 1990. The N.C.V.S., by contrast, shows that it declined by around forty per cent during the same period. Researchers at Vanderbilt University looked into the discrepancy; they found that the upward trend in the U.C.R. data correlated with upticks in the number of female police officers, and with the advent of rape crisis centers and reformed investigative styles. It could be, in short, that a modernized approach to the policing of rape drastically increased the frequency with which it was reported while reducing its incidence. But coherent stories like these only sometimes emerge from the conflicting data.
Matthew Hutson, New Yorker