Re: various

And I think that in social science research in particular, "all data is
political." The research methods and sample groups used in the abortion
study in particular, I believe, were suspect, and though the book's author
may have disclaimed any normative or policy significance to the data, the
study has been cited approvingly in some contexts by abortion advocates.

On 3/27/06, Jim Armstrong <jarmstro@qwest.net> wrote:
>
> Data may be data, but this book is more about interpretation.
> For example, I think his conclusion that reading to young children is of
> no apparent benefit is ludicrous.
> JimA
>
> Carol or John Burgeson wrote:
>
> >David wrote: "I wouldn't put too much normative stock in Freakonomics.
> >It also cites research suggesting that abortion has a net positive effect
> >on educational acheivement because poor African-American unwed mothers
> >are statistically the biggest users of abortion services and their
> >children statistically are the weakest educational performers. Whatever
> >you think about abortion, I don't think you'd want to argue that it's a
> >good thing because it culls out poor black kids."
> >
> >Neither does the author of FREAKONOMICS. He makes that point very clear
> >in the book.
> >
> >In any case, the book is a "popular" one, not scholarly. Behind the
> >findings are, I understand, good scientific research papers.
> >
> >Data is data, whether one "likes" it or not.
> >
> >Burgy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Mon Mar 27 13:15:17 2006