83 Matching Annotations
  1. Feb 2022
    1. I wrote about this paper: https://socopen.org/2021/12/08/when-socarxiv-gets-bad-papers/

      In part: "Depending on which critique you prefer, the paper is either very poor quality or else deliberately false and misleading."

  2. Aug 2020
    1. scientific validity is not guaranteed,

      scientific validity is not guaranteed with peer-reviewed work either.

  3. Jul 2020
    1. Their ultimate goal is to create in the present a future that overthrows the logic of neoliberalism
    2. They didn’t want equal opportunity in a burning house; they wanted to build a new house
    3. it never occurred to us to refuse to read a text simply because it validated the racism, sexism, free-market ideology, and bourgeois liberalism against which we railed. Nothing was off limits. On the contrary
    4. Study groups
    5. the formal classroom was never the space for deep critique precisely because it was not a place of love
    6. if we argue that state violence is merely a manifestation of anti-blackness because that is what we see and feel, we are left with no theory of the state and have no way of understanding racialized police violence in places such as Atlanta and Detroit, where most cops are black
    7. how can we embrace our students and acknowledge their pain while remaining wary of a culture that reduces structural oppression to misunderstanding and psychology?
    8. This is also why diversity and cultural-competency training are the most popular strategies for addressing campus racism. As if racism were a manifestation of our “incompetent” handling of “difference.”
    9. It is difficult to see this in a world where words such as trauma, PTSD, micro-aggression, and triggers have virtually replaced oppression, repression, and subjugation
    10. The triumph of liberal multiculturalism also meant a shift from a radical anti-capitalist critique to a politics of recognition. This means, for example, that we now embrace the right of same-sex couples to marry so long as they do not challenge the institution itself
    11. the programmatic adoption of diversity, inclusion, and multiculturalism vampirized the energy of a radical movement that began by demanding the complete transformation of the social order and the eradication of all forms of racial, gender, sexual, and class hierarchy
    12. Powerful as this might be, the solution to racism still is shifted to the realm of self-help and human resources
    13. Managing trauma does not require dismantling structural racism
    14. Resistance is our heritage. And resistance is our healing
    15. Violence was used not only to break bodies but to discipline people who refused enslavement
    16. But what sustained enslaved African people was a memory of freedom, dreams of seizing it, and conspiracies to enact it—fugitive planning, if you will
    17. the popularity of Ta-Nehisi Coates’s Between the World and Me (2015), especially among black college students, rests on his singular emphasis on fear, trauma, and the black body
    18. reading black experience through trauma can easily slip into thinking of ourselves as victims and objects rather than agents
    19. anchors violence in their collective consciousness, produces fear and paranoia—wrapped elegantly in thrill—and shrouds the many ways capitalism, militarism, and racism are killing black and brown people
    20. While every generation of black Americans has experienced unrelenting violence, this is the first one compelled to witness virtually all of it, to endure the snuffing out of black lives in real time, looped over and over again, until the next murder knocks it off the news.
    21. Contrast this with black student protesters who appeal to the university to “repair a broken community,” to make students “feel safe, accepted, supported and like they belong,” and to remedy their sense of alienation through “intense ‘inclusion and belonging’ training for all levels of students, staff, faculty, and administration.”
    22. “It cannot be denied that the university is a place of refuge, and it cannot be accepted that the university is a place of enlightenment. In the face of these conditions one can only sneak into the university and steal what one can.”
    23. The authors advocate refuge in and sabotage from the undercommons, a subaltern, subversive way of being in but not of the university
    24. Less than two decades later, the United Coalition Against Racism, a student organization at the University of Michigan, established the Ella Baker – Nelson Mandela Center for Anti-Racist Education (BMC). The center was never conceived as a safe space for students of color but rather as a resource for anti-racist struggles “dedicated to the principle of thinking in order to act.”
    25. A smaller, more radical contingent of protesters is less sanguine about the university’s capacity to change. Rejecting the family metaphor, these students understand that universities are not walled off from the “real world” but instead are corporate entities in their own right. These students are not fighting for a “supportive” educational environment, but a liberated one that not only promotes but also models social and economic justice
    26. while trauma can be an entrance into activism, it is not in itself a destination and may even trick activists into adopting the language of the neoliberal institutions they are at pains to reject
    27. I challenge student activists to not cleave their activism from their intellectual lives or mistakenly believe that because the university does not offer them the education they crave, it is beyond their reach.
  4. Jun 2020
    1. Analysis of hospital traffic and searchengine data in Wuhan China indicatesearly disease activity in the Fall of 201

      Review notes by Philip N. Cohen. I think this paper is a huge, speculate stretch. At best it is mildly suggestive. At worst it's post-analysis hypothesizing of cherry-picked results. Key problems include lack of checking for other symptom internet searches, and the use of a crude eyeball-check on the parking lot data. The justification also reads as post-hoc, with a few loosely- or non-related papers cited as rationale. Decision: reject and resubmit with headline-level caveats. Next time preregister.

    2. also could include loss of taste and smell

      this would have been good to check the searches for, no?

    3. we hypothesize that broad community transmission may have led to more acute cases requiring medical attention, resulting in higher viral loads and worse symptoms

      This is literally hypothesizing after results known (HARK)

    4. gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are a unique feature of COVID-19 disease

      that's just ridiculous. Unique?

    5. Here we show increased hospital traffic and symptom search data in Wuhan preceded the documented start of the SARS-CoV-2pandemic in December2019. While we cannotconfirm if the increased volume was directly related to the new virus, ourevidence supports other recent work showing that emergence happened before identification at the Huanan Seafood market. These findings also corroborate the hypothesis that the virus emerged naturally in southern Chinaand was potentiallyalready circulating at the time of the Wuhan cluster7

      This is just a colossal stretch. There is a little uptick of health search terms, and a noisy bounce in the traffic analysis. This seems a lot like post-hoc reasoning. Was there a reason to focus on August? It would have been nice to register that hypothesis before digging around (apparently selectively) in this data.

    6. 7

      I could be wrong, but I don't see how this paper is relevant to the claim the virus was circulating in Wuhan in August. One of the authors has a thread on the paper, here: https://twitter.com/PeterDaszak/status/1267474894671024132. Doesn't mention anything about earlier infection of humans, just the geographic and evolutionary origin.

    7. “cough”and“diarrhea”

      were these the only two search terms analyzed? Why? There are many other potential symptoms potentially associated with COVID-19

    8. 8

      This paper reports on a single (positive) test performed in a hospital on an individual with no relevant travel history, in France, and analyzed retrospectively much later. Further, the researchers tested a bunch of other people at the same time and found no other positive cases.

    1. Trump poses an existential threat to democracy; Black Lives Matter does no

      In June 2020 I'm reading back and this line stands out again

    1. I read this paper and declined to endorse it. I think the evidence is not systematically presented in such a way to justify the conclusions offered. The paper uses a straw-person argument about a "one-size fits all approach," which doesn't describe actual covid-19 policies. A better analysis would look beyond the policies to the level of social distancing and movement restrictions, which have been documented elsewhere.

  5. May 2020
  6. Apr 2019
    1. Declining sex is at least partly about family and religious changes that make it harder for people to achieve stable, coupled life at a young age.

      Are they seriously saying that less premarital sex makes it harder to have a good marriage? Because that's the opposite of what conservatives have been telling us for a long time.

      This post on their website, by Nicholas Wolfinger, concludes: "the surprisingly large number of Americans reporting one lifetime sex partner have the happiest marriages." https://ifstudies.org/blog/does-sexual-history-affect-marital-happiness

    2. Thus, while most of the decline in happiness is about declining sex, that’s not the end of the story.

      this has not been shown in the piece - either the "decline in happiness" or its supposed explanation by declining sex.

    3. If Americans still had sex like they did in 2008, or even 2012, we might be a much happier country

      According to the figure. If sexual frequency hadn't changed, happiness would be 29%. In 2008 it was 28%. So this is "a much happier country"? Without checking this work, the chance they screwed it up is pretty high, but even if they did it right the conclusion is ridiculous.

    4. regularly

      they don't say how they define "regularly." The GSS variable is a 7-point scale from "almost daily" to "never".

      I don't find any numbers from 2018 that match what they report in the figure (64% for women, 35% for men).

      In fact, men are more likely to "spend an evening with friends" than women are.

    5. Less involvement in the life of a local church, mosque, temple, or synagogue, we speculate, might translate into less happiness for young adults.

      people who attend more are happier, but this does not significantly alter the (nonsignificant) trend in happiness among 18-34s.

    6. (People with very infrequent religious attendance are even less happy than never-attenders; in terms of happiness, a little religion is worse than none.)

      this difference is not statistically significant at p<.05

    7. Less coupling, then, probably explains some of the decline in happiness among young adults.

      Statistically, the decline in marriage explains more than all of the (nonsignificant) decline in happiness mo 1972 to 2018. That is, once marriage is controlled, happiness among 18-34-year-olds has increased rather than (nonsignificantly) decreasing.

    8. Happiness fell most among young men—with only 22 percent of young men (and 28 percent of young women) reporting that they were “very happy” in 2018.

      Men's "very happy" proportion was almost as low in the 1970s, and 1990s (within a percentage point).

    9. a record low. The share of adults ages 18 to 34 reporting that they were“very happy” in life fell to 25 percent—the lowest level that the General Social Survey, a key barometer of American social life, has ever recorded for that population.

      The percentage of adults under age 35 in the GSS who said they were very happy in 2018 was 25.4%. This is the lowest level recorded in the GSS. At the .05 level of statistical significance, this is not different from the levels observed in 1972, 1975, 1977, 1980, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1986, 1991, 1994, 1996, 2006, 2008, 2010, 2014, or 2016. In 1994, for example, the level was 26.8%.

    10. Controlling for basic demographics and other social characteristics, married young adults are about 75 percent more likely to report that they are very happy, compared with their peers who are not married, according to our analysis of the GSS, a nationally representative survey conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago

      Controlling for age, sex, race, latino origin, education, and religious affiliation, 40.2% of married adults ages 18-34 are "very happy," compared with 22.6% of those who aren't married. This is a difference of 17.6 percentage points, but you could call it a difference of 78% if you want to make it seem larger. (my analysis of 2014-2018 GSS)

  7. Feb 2019
    1. Your husband was just killed in Maryland. Incredible man just killed

      Trump is referring to Carlos Wolff, who was killed in a traffic accident 14 months ago. The man charged in his death had entered the country legally eight years earlier and overstayed his visa. He was fined for negligent driving. https://wamu.org/story/19/02/15/trump-highlights-maryland-family-in-call-for-border-wall/

    2. saved a tremendous, just a tremendous amount on would be sending the military

      The emergency declaration will take money from other military projects to pay for the wall. There is no evidence this will save the military money.

    3. in Tijuana, you have a lot of people staying

      By refusing to process the claims of asylum seekers, Trump has created a backlog of people waiting in Tijuana. https://www.vox.com/2018/11/28/18089048/border-asylum-trump-metering-legally-ports.

    4. rebuilding the military
    5. campaign promise

      Trump's campaign promise to make Mexico pay for the wall is preserved here: https://web.archive.org/web/20161105151917/https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/Pay_for_the_Wall.pdf. He said he would block Mexican immigrants from sending remittances back to their families unless Mexico paid the US government "a one-time payment of $5 to $10 billion."

    6. announced over the next 24 hours

      This did not happen.

    7. a lot of great announcements having to do with Syria and our success with the eradication of the caliphate

      Trump announced "We have won against ISIS" on December 19, 2018: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/us/politics/trump-syria-turkey-troop-withdrawal.html

    8. So we have far more people trying to get into our country today than probably we have ever had before and we have done an incredible job in stopping them

      Border detentions have increased this year over previous years (https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration), but remain at about one-third of mid-2000s levels (https://www.npr.org/2018/06/22/622246815/unauthorized-immigration-in-three-graphs).

      Visa applications, both immigrant and non-immigrant, fell 13% from 2016 to 2018: https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/AnnualReports/FY2018AnnualReport/FY18AnnualReport%20-%20TableI.pdf

    9. the previous administration, it was heading south and it was going fast

      there is no major economic indicator that was "heading south" before Trump took office.

    10. almost 40,000 murders—40,000
    11. We have detained more people

      Border detentions have increased this year over previous years (https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration), but remain at about one-third of mid-2000s levels (https://www.npr.org/2018/06/22/622246815/unauthorized-immigration-in-three-graphs)

    12. You can’t take human traffic, women and girls, you can’t take them through ports of entry. You can’t have them tied up in the back seat of a car or a truck or a van. They open the door, they look. If they can’t see three women with tape on their mouth or three women whose hands are tied. They go through areas where you have no wall.

      This depiction of human trafficking has been widely debunked.

      "According to data from the Department of Justice, in 2017, roughly two-thirds of the trafficking victims who were served by organizations that received funding from the Office for Victims of Crime were U.S. citizens. Among non-citizens, illegal border-crossing is not typically the issue. 'Most of the victims we work with come in on perfectly good visas,” Martina Vandenberg, the founder and president of the Human Trafficking Legal Center, told me." https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-hypocrisy-of-trumps-anti-trafficking-argument-for-a-border-wall

    13. It’s wrong. It’s wrong. It’s just a lie. It’s all a lie. They say walls don’t work. Walls work 100 percent. Whether it’s El Paso—I really was smiling because the other night I was in El Paso, we had a tremendous crowd, tremendous crowd, and I asked the people, many of whom were from El Paso, but they came from all over Texas, and I asked, them, I said, “Let me ask you as a crowd, when the wall went up, was it better?” You were there, some of you. It was not only better, it was like 100 percent better.

      Violent crime in El Paso has been about half the average for large cities for the last decade, and the construction of border fencing in the city had no effect on the violence crime trend: https://www.elpasotimes.com/story/opinion/2019/02/15/violent-crime-el-paso-before-and-after-border-fence-column/2875181002/

    14. But we have a very good trading relationship with U.K. and that has just been strengthened further

      "According to YouGov’s polling, 11 percent of Britons believe Trump is a great or good president. But 67 percent, a vast majority, believe he is a poor or terrible president." https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-popular-britain-heres-what-polling-says-1016136. Support for and confidence in Trump is drastically lower in the UK and among many other US allies than it was under Obama: http://www.pewglobal.org/2018/10/01/trumps-international-ratings-remain-low-especially-among-key-allies/.

    15. We have been losing, on average, $375 billion a year with China

      This is a reference to the good trade deficit. It is not the US "losing" anything, it's American consumers buying Chinese goods.

    16. A lot of people think it is $506 billion. Some people think it is much more than that

      I don't think anyone reputable thinks that.

  8. Sep 2018
    1. one such case

      This case cries out for preprint publication. Is there any reason this work can't be posted before it is "published," other than the commercial interests of the book or journal publisher?

    2. But as part of the three years they get – already much too short to research and write a PhD thesis in many cases – they have to wait months and months to hear if their article is accepted, and then at least another year before it is published. This wait raises anxiety, which is counter-productive for the larger project

      In math and natural sciences this time lag has been the big driver toward preprint publishing, which has become widely accepted. I don't know anything about how humanities disciplines can deal with this. If the suggestion is to abolish peer review, then it seems equivalent to publishing preprints -- you just publish your work without review (do you even need an editor or a publisher then? If they are reviewing your work, that's at least something like peer review, and it adds delay as well.) (Also, what discipline only gives people 3 years to complete a PhD?)

    3. Through the anonymity, it may lure people to be nasty, to fight out their personal dislike of people or approaches

      I completely agree here.

    4. One of those rules is the unquestioned system that all respectable, serious academic journals and book series have to obey the requirement to have all submissions for publication “peer-reviewed”

      I am curious about this history. In the sciences, including social sciences, peer-review came a lot earlier than the neo-liberal academy. Maybe it's newer in the humanities fields assumed here, or maybe we're dating neo-liberalism differently.

      My comments here might be irrelevant to people who are far from the fields I understand (social sciences, a little about other sciences).

    5. This reviewer couldn’t stand that I had walked into a territory he considered his property

      I don't think I would blame this on peer review per se, but on the secrecy of the system, which protects such bad actors.

    6. Since the judgments are asked from people established in a field, these may not welcome innovations that can potentially challenge their fixed views

      this seems like a big problem for any field. Again, I think opening the process would help, because such rearguard status-conserving behavior could be exposed.

    7. I can’t blame this on the reviewers, who get no credit whatsoever for this labour.

      I'm reading this with an eye toward the problems I'm already thinking about, especially open peer review and open access publishing. If reviewing was open, it could rewarded as part of the scholarly endeavor, and it would be more "worth" the time of good scholars to do it -- and if it weren't in service of for-profit publishers then the fact of it being unpaid wouldn't be so bad, because it would be genuine public service.

  9. Aug 2018
    1. A Murmurations restricted group offers content creators the opportunity to engage with reflectors and facilitators from the journal team. The result is a world-readable annotation layer on top of the version of record.

      I love this idea.

  10. Jul 2018
    1. beings


    2. accept the discomfort


    3. Yes, of course we need to teach students from other cultures what the rules of the dominant academic culture are, but we need to do it in a way that recognizes it as a problem of cultural conflict, not learning the “right” way to behave, and respect the stresses and issues involved in cultural adaptation and learning to be bicultural.

      I realized it was obnoxious to pressure students to address me by my first name, which is often a question of cultural norms. I say it's OK either way, and I let it go.

    4. “It is my goal to make every student in this class feel included and welcome and my goal to help everybody learn this material. I know that we all have different backgrounds and experiences and that I may unintentionally say something that offends you or makes you feel uncomfortable. If this happens, I hope you will tell me.”

      I don't have much background in theater, but I try to think of these moments like that -- I try to say it overly clearly and straightforwardly, in short sentences, with jazz hands, and wait way longer than feels natural for a reaction. The academic tendency to understate, think out loud, and stress nuance and irony, all work against this kind of message being understood and taken seriously.

    5. This essay is about constructive ways for respondingto criticism about how your style as a person of power or privilege may be hurting others in your teaching or advising.

      I think this essay is a model for being at once sociological and introspective, for a reflexive analysis of feelings in the context of power and politics within academia. I hope it will inspire others.

    6. I love how this began as a blog post, was upgraded to a paper on SocArXiv -- where it gets a DOI and proper metadata -- and then published in condensed form on the popular Inside Higher Ed site (https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2018/07/18/advice-dealing-criticism-person-privilege-academe-opinion). Kudos to Oliver for that.