On the phenomenon of Freakonomics

Andrew Gelman and I laid out our thoughts about the Freakonomics phenomenon in this piece in American Scientist.

The article seems to have connected with a segment of readers who are also troubled by some of their more casual commentary. Sometimes lost in this dialog is our conclusion that:

Readers should apply the same skepticism to the claims of Freakonomics as they would to the much-derided conventional wisdom. We encourage them to revisit these modern-day classics with a skeptical and inquiring mind. And we hope that future works in the pop-statistics genre will continue to impart a sense of the fun and importance of statistical reasoning, while more clearly recognizing the uncertainty and complexity inherent in scientific study of the world.

In the piece, we speculate on how this genre can further develop, and suggest ways to avoid some of the pitfalls.

Andrew's take is here. My previous commentary on SuperFreakonomics is here, here, here, here and here.

 

 

Comments

[pti.edu]

To get an inquiring mind, as you suggest, one has to be an academic gratuaded. That is for sure the principal material students learn in colleges or academic institutes, to think and not to take every declaration for granted.