Comments on: Function of Stat Academia

By: economics master's student

economics master's student — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:30:58 +0000

Yeah, I’m obviously talking about math, not mere math. Perfect for PhD prep and signalling that you’re a powerful human being, but overkill for nearly all practical applications.

But, hey, if it’s a status-mongering world then play it as it lies.

By: Popeye

Popeye — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 21:12:18 +0000

And preferring to work on useful stuff is also a way to signal status.

And you know what’s a really great way to signal status? To talk about how everything boils down to signalling status.

And an even better way to signal status? Talk about how status theory predicts that even if status theory is true, people will not believe in status theory because it’s true, but only because it’s a good way of signalling status.

I’m king of the world!

By: fburnaby

fburnaby — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:31:15 +0000

Typo above. I have one too many zeros: should be $10,000,000.

By: fburnaby

fburnaby — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:29:55 +0000

Yup. My research uses geospatial and oceaongraphic data. My entire research project could be replaced by a few sampling programs over 5 years, instead of having me do 2 years worth of analysis on existing data. The difference is that my time costs maybe $60,000 (inc. overheads) over those 2 years (I’m a student), and the sampling program would cost O($100,000,000).

Obviously it’s rational for myself (and O(5) ) others need to milk this data for all it’s worth.

This is probably a niche thing that no-one outside of academia would do, but there is a practical need for some more complicated (what might get accused of “masturbatory”) approaches. But it’s my understanding that this is what university research departments are *for* — solving the non-standard problems. Academia is where you go to do work that, while important, no-one else would bother with.

By: ChristianK

ChristianK — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:01:01 +0000

Preferring to work on intrinsic interestingness instead of working on useful stuff is a way to signal status.

From an evolutionary perspective low status people can’t waste their precious time with things that have intrinsic interestingness.
Those people with high status who don’t have to spend their time with practical stuff however can spend their time on things with intrinsic interestingness.

By: valter

valter — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:43:28 +0000

No, you need the math (or at least some kinds of math) even if you want to do applied work. Real life seldom throws you problems that you can solve simply by pressing a button in Stata; you have to know what lies behind the buttons both to decide which buttons to press and to write up your own models and algorithms when no button would work.

(nothing in the above statement should be construed as an endorsement of the typical standard curriculum of undergraduate and graduate economics education; that would require a separate lengthy discussion, but my personal belief is that the total weight of math in the ideal curriculum is not going to be any lower than it is)

By: valter

valter — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:31:25 +0000

I agree with Peter Gardes. I would push his argument even further: fads may also be generated by intrinsic interestingness independently of any status seeking (though I am not denying the importance of the latter here). If you hear a lot of colleagues talking about a given class of problems, you may simply get more curious about that class; and, when you start digging, almost any area of research will present interesting tidbits. I guess it is a kind of rational herding.

By: michael vassar

michael vassar — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:28:41 +0000

Might more complex methods be appropriate where data is more expensive to collect, time horizons are longer, testing more difficult, etc?

By: economics master's student

economics master's student — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 12:13:14 +0000

Right, you need the math if you want to play with the big boys. And the fun train never stops if you signed up because you wanted to study math and statistics. Economics is what you learn on your own time.

I’m happy, but my brain was never poisoned by the thought that I might learn something useful.

By: Peter Gerdes

Peter Gerdes — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:47:03 +0000

Don’t neglect the issue of intrinsic interestingness. Things which require novel thoughtful solutions can provide pleasure that more mundane work does not. This, frankly, is what drives a great deal of mathematics though fads do play a part.