Reverse regression - Revision history

IssaRice at 00:25, 15 January 2019

2019-01-15T00:25:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:25, 15 January 2019
Line 16:		Line 16:

	<references/>		<references/>

			[[Category:Causal inference]]

IssaRice at 02:36, 9 July 2018

2018-07-09T02:36:33Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:36, 9 July 2018
Line 6:		Line 6:

	Relation to [[Simpson's paradox]] is discussed in http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/tkh/publications/papers/reg.paradox.TAS.pdf		Relation to [[Simpson's paradox]] is discussed in http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/tkh/publications/papers/reg.paradox.TAS.pdf

			Also see https://concretenonsense.wordpress.com/2013/02/16/defense-against-the-dark-arts-the-reverse-regression-effect/

	==History==		==History==

IssaRice at 21:10, 2 June 2018

2018-06-02T21:10:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:10, 2 June 2018
Line 4:		Line 4:

	There is some discussion of this on ''LessWrong''.<ref>https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/FGsoajyYJRczieqh5/understanding-simpson-s-paradox/comment/JyrGhmYj8xSHgPqst</ref>		There is some discussion of this on ''LessWrong''.<ref>https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/FGsoajyYJRczieqh5/understanding-simpson-s-paradox/comment/JyrGhmYj8xSHgPqst</ref>

			Relation to [[Simpson's paradox]] is discussed in http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/tkh/publications/papers/reg.paradox.TAS.pdf

	==History==		==History==

IssaRice at 20:57, 2 June 2018

2018-06-02T20:57:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:57, 2 June 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Reverse regression''' refers to a problem in statistical inference where a conclusion is reversed depending on the variable being adjusted.		'''Reverse regression''' refers to a problem in statistical inference where a conclusion is reversed depending on the variable being adjusted.

	The example given by Pearl is that of salary discrimination: comparing the salaries of equally qualified men and women, we see that men earned a higher salary, but comparing the qualifications of equally paid men and women, we see that men are more qualified (p. 426).<ref>Judea Pearl. "Epilogue: The Art and Science of Cause and Effect" in ''Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference''. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press. 2009.</ref>		The example given by Pearl is that of salary discrimination: comparing the salaries of equally qualified men and women, we see that men earned a higher salary, but comparing the qualifications of equally paid men and women, we see that men are more qualified (p. 426).<ref name="pearl-epilogue">Judea Pearl. "Epilogue: The Art and Science of Cause and Effect" in ''Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference''. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press. 2009.</ref>

	There is some discussion of this on ''LessWrong''.<ref>https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/FGsoajyYJRczieqh5/understanding-simpson-s-paradox/comment/JyrGhmYj8xSHgPqst</ref>		There is some discussion of this on ''LessWrong''.<ref>https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/FGsoajyYJRczieqh5/understanding-simpson-s-paradox/comment/JyrGhmYj8xSHgPqst</ref>
Line 7:		Line 7:
	==History==		==History==

	Judea Pearl says the "controversy" "occupied the social science literature in the 1970s".		Judea Pearl says the "controversy" "occupied the social science literature in the 1970s".<ref name="pearl-epilogue" />

	==References==		==References==

	<references/>		<references/>

IssaRice at 20:56, 2 June 2018

2018-06-02T20:56:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:56, 2 June 2018
Line 2:		Line 2:

	The example given by Pearl is that of salary discrimination: comparing the salaries of equally qualified men and women, we see that men earned a higher salary, but comparing the qualifications of equally paid men and women, we see that men are more qualified (p. 426).<ref>Judea Pearl. "Epilogue: The Art and Science of Cause and Effect" in ''Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference''. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press. 2009.</ref>		The example given by Pearl is that of salary discrimination: comparing the salaries of equally qualified men and women, we see that men earned a higher salary, but comparing the qualifications of equally paid men and women, we see that men are more qualified (p. 426).<ref>Judea Pearl. "Epilogue: The Art and Science of Cause and Effect" in ''Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference''. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press. 2009.</ref>

			There is some discussion of this on ''LessWrong''.<ref>https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/FGsoajyYJRczieqh5/understanding-simpson-s-paradox/comment/JyrGhmYj8xSHgPqst</ref>

	==History==		==History==

IssaRice: Created page with "'''Reverse regression''' refers to a problem in statistical inference where a conclusion is reversed depending on the variable being adjusted. The example given by Pearl is t..."

2018-06-02T20:54:08Z

Created page with "'''Reverse regression''' refers to a problem in statistical inference where a conclusion is reversed depending on the variable being adjusted. The example given by Pearl is t..."

New page

'''Reverse regression''' refers to a problem in statistical inference where a conclusion is reversed depending on the variable being adjusted.

The example given by Pearl is that of salary discrimination: comparing the salaries of equally qualified men and women, we see that men earned a higher salary, but comparing the qualifications of equally paid men and women, we see that men are more qualified (p. 426).<ref>Judea Pearl. "Epilogue: The Art and Science of Cause and Effect" in ''Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference''. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press. 2009.</ref>

==History==

Judea Pearl says the "controversy" "occupied the social science literature in the 1970s".

==References==

<references/>