2 Apr
2007
2 Apr
'07
6:46 p.m.
hello all,
here are the readings for next week.
Paul W. Holland. 1986. Statistics and Causal Inference. Journal of the
American Statistical Association 81: 945-960.
Paul R. Rosenbaum and Donald B. Rubin. 1985. Constructing a Control
Group Using Multivariate Matched Sampling Methods That Incorporate the
Propensity Score. The American Statistician 39: 33-38.
cheers,
Holger
--
Holger Lutz Kern
Graduate Student
Department of Government
Cornell University
Institute for Quantitative Social Science
Harvard University
1737 Cambridge Street N350
Cambridge, MA 02138
www.people.cornell.edu/pages/hlk23
9 Apr
9 Apr
12:01 p.m.
New subject: [gov2001-l] Copies of Memo
Hey Everyone,
Please bring in *four* copies of the replication of the other group's replication
memo
today (one for Holger and me and three for the other group).
Cheers,
Justin
2:04 p.m.
New subject: [gov2001-l] Copies of Memo
Hi Justin,
Since I didn't turn in my replication paper on time, I didn't get
another student's paper to review. I know I should have asked about this
last week, but is there any way I can make this assignment up?
I can come in to office hours this week to discuss this.
Thanks,
Alex
Justin Ryan Grimmer wrote:
Hey Everyone,
Please bring in *four* copies of the replication of the other group's replication
memo
today (one for Holger and me and three for the other group).
Cheers,
Justin
_______________________________________________
gov2001-l mailing list
gov2001-l at lists.fas.harvard.edu
http://lists.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/gov2001-l
2:10 p.m.
New subject: [gov2001-l] Copies of Memo
Sorry all -- that should have been private.
Oops,
Alex
Alex Nicholas D'Amour wrote:
Hi Justin,
Since I didn't turn in my replication paper on time, I didn't get
another student's paper to review. I know I should have asked about this
last week, but is there any way I can make this assignment up?
I can come in to office hours this week to discuss this.
Thanks,
Alex
Justin Ryan Grimmer wrote:
Hey Everyone,
Please bring in *four* copies of the replication of the other group's replication
memo
today (one for Holger and me and three for the other group).
Cheers,
Justin
_______________________________________________
gov2001-l mailing list
gov2001-l at lists.fas.harvard.edu
http://lists.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/gov2001-l
_______________________________________________
gov2001-l mailing list
gov2001-l at lists.fas.harvard.edu
http://lists.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/gov2001-l 
3:10 p.m.
New subject: [gov2001-l] Copies of Memo
Dude,
you accidently forwarded this to everyone.
so, will you def. be here this summer? Have you looked at housing? I'm waiting
to hear about the iqss summer school thing, but i'll be here for at least a
month anyway.
Best,
Isa
Quoting Alex Nicholas D'Amour <damour at fas.harvard.edu>:
Hi Justin,
Since I didn't turn in my replication paper on time, I didn't get
another student's paper to review. I know I should have asked about this
last week, but is there any way I can make this assignment up?
I can come in to office hours this week to discuss this.
Thanks,
Alex
Justin Ryan Grimmer wrote:
Hey Everyone,
Please bring in *four* copies of the replication of the other group's
replication memo
today (one for Holger and me and three for the
other group).
Cheers,
Justin
_______________________________________________
gov2001-l mailing list
gov2001-l at lists.fas.harvard.edu
http://lists.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/gov2001-l
_______________________________________________
gov2001-l mailing list
gov2001-l at lists.fas.harvard.edu
http://lists.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/gov2001-l
30 Apr
30 Apr
4:11 p.m.
New subject: [gov2001-l] Sen/Landau abstract
Hi everyone,
Here is our abstract. Thanks in advance for your comments.
David Landau & Maya Sen
Title: What do Justice Blackmun?s Oral Argument Grades Really Measure?:
Revisiting Johnson et al.?s ?The Influence of Oral Argument on the U.S. Supreme
Court.?
Abstract:
Johnson et al.?s recent article ?The Influence of Oral Argument on the Supreme
Court? (2006), demonstrates a positive relationship between grades that Justice
Blackmun privately gave to the oral arguments of arguing attorneys and the
merits votes of all of the justices. Johnson et al. use this finding to claim
that the quality of oral argument has a causal effect on Supreme Court merits
votes, striking a blow against the dominant attitudinal model of Supreme Court
decision-making. We find that the positive association between Blackmun?s oral
argument grade and merits votes falls sharply as the ideological distance
between Justice Blackmun and the voting justice increases. This may well mean
that Justice Blackmun?s oral argument grade is merely measuring ideology,
rather than acting as a true measure of oral argument quality. It is difficult
to demonstrate a causal link between oral argument quality and merits votes
using Justice Blackmun?s subjective oral argument grades as the dependent
variable.
4:14 p.m.
New subject: [gov2001-l] Sen/Landau abstract
It's too bad we can't posthumously administer some vignettes to Justice
Blackmun.
landau at fas.harvard.edu wrote:
Hi everyone,
Here is our abstract. Thanks in advance for your comments.
David Landau & Maya Sen
Title: What do Justice Blackmun?s Oral Argument Grades Really Measure?:
Revisiting Johnson et al.?s ?The Influence of Oral Argument on the U.S. Supreme
Court.?
Abstract:
Johnson et al.?s recent article ?The Influence of Oral Argument on the Supreme
Court? (2006), demonstrates a positive relationship between grades that Justice
Blackmun privately gave to the oral arguments of arguing attorneys and the
merits votes of all of the justices. Johnson et al. use this finding to claim
that the quality of oral argument has a causal effect on Supreme Court merits
votes, striking a blow against the dominant attitudinal model of Supreme Court
decision-making. We find that the positive association between Blackmun?s oral
argument grade and merits votes falls sharply as the ideological distance
between Justice Blackmun and the voting justice increases. This may well mean
that Justice Blackmun?s oral argument grade is merely measuring ideology,
rather than acting as a true measure of oral argument quality. It is difficult
to demonstrate a causal link between oral argument quality and merits votes
using Justice Blackmun?s subjective oral argument grades as the dependent
variable.
_______________________________________________
gov2001-l mailing list
gov2001-l at lists.fas.harvard.edu
http://lists.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/gov2001-l
1 May
1 May
8:48 a.m.
New subject: [gov2001-l] Sen/Landau abstract
looks like a nice result. (i take it that johnson didn't look at
ideological distance as you did.)
so now the question is how much you can claim. you have the abstract
written very tentatively, which is appropriate if that's what you have
learned. but if the results are strong, which seem to be implied by the
one sentence where you describe them here, then I would probably reword
the abstract to be stronger.
i.e. it could have the structure of: (1) Johnson et al introduce a clever
new measure of oral argument quality as judged by one of the justices
(Blackman) and show that it predicts judicial outcomes, contrary to that
implied by most political science literature on the courts, (2) although
that the measure introduced is an indicator of ideology, not (perhaps
only) of oral argument quality, as oral arguments were judged far more
harshly the more they differed from Blackman's view. (3) we conclude that
the polsci literature had it right from the start. etc...
it just depends whether your empirical analyses can withstand this more
forceful argument. if it can, then its definitely worth making..
Gary
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007, landau at fas.harvard.edu wrote:
Hi everyone,
Here is our abstract. Thanks in advance for your comments.
David Landau & Maya Sen
Title: What do Justice Blackmun?s Oral Argument Grades Really Measure?:
Revisiting Johnson et al.?s ?The Influence of Oral Argument on the U.S. Supreme
Court.?
Abstract:
Johnson et al.?s recent article ?The Influence of Oral Argument on the Supreme
Court? (2006), demonstrates a positive relationship between grades that Justice
Blackmun privately gave to the oral arguments of arguing attorneys and the
merits votes of all of the justices. Johnson et al. use this finding to claim
that the quality of oral argument has a causal effect on Supreme Court merits
votes, striking a blow against the dominant attitudinal model of Supreme Court
decision-making. We find that the positive association between Blackmun?s oral
argument grade and merits votes falls sharply as the ideological distance
between Justice Blackmun and the voting justice increases. This may well mean
that Justice Blackmun?s oral argument grade is merely measuring ideology,
rather than acting as a true measure of oral argument quality. It is difficult
to demonstrate a causal link between oral argument quality and merits votes
using Justice Blackmun?s subjective oral argument grades as the dependent
variable.
_______________________________________________
gov2001-l mailing list
gov2001-l at lists.fas.harvard.edu
http://lists.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/gov2001-l
6216
days inactive
6245
days old
gov2001@lists.gking.harvard.edu
7 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
chingos＠fas.harvard.edu -
damour＠fas.harvard.edu -
hlk23＠cornell.edu -
ichaves＠fas.harvard.edu -
jgrimmer＠fas.harvard.edu -
king＠harvard.edu -
landau＠fas.harvard.edu