Andrew Gelman
Andrew Gelman

Andrew Gelman is a professor of statistics and political science at Columbia University and author of several books, most recently Bayesian Data Analysis.

Science
Nov. 22 2016 6:02 PMStop Saying the Election Was RiggedTrump’s win was always an option, and the theories suggesting otherwise aren’t based on facts.
Politics
Nov. 7 2016 5:40 PMWhat Are the Chances Your Vote Matters?A state-by-state ranking of how likely it is that your vote swings the election. (But you should still vote!)
Science
Oct. 3 2016 1:49 PMWhy Does the Replication Crisis Seem Worse in Psychology?The same problems are facing other fields, too. Here’s why you hear about it most in psychology.
Politics
Aug. 5 2016 3:38 PMTrump’s Up 3! Clinton’s Up 9!Why you shouldn’t be fooled by polling bounces.
The Slatest
June 29 2016 6:48 PMIs Texit the Next Brexit?
Science
Nov. 11 2015 12:38 PMIs the Death Rate Really Increasing for Middle-Aged White Americans?I ran the numbers, and the story isn’t as simple as it seems.
Science
July 24 2013 12:37 PMToo Good to Be TrueStatistics may say that women wear red when they’re fertile … but you can’t always trust statistics.
Politics
Nov. 10 2016 3:46 PMTrump Beat Romney by 2 PointsThat’s what won him the election. Here’s why we didn’t know it would happen.
Future Tense
Nov. 1 2016 9:15 AMThe Polls of the Future Are Reproducible and Open SourceThey’re following the scientific push toward transparency, and they’ll put everything else out of business.
Politics
Aug. 31 2016 5:45 AMTrump-Clinton Probably Won’t Be a Landslide. The Economy Says So.Conventional wisdom is that fringe candidates get repudiated, à la 1964 and 1972. The story isn’t so simple.
Moneybox
July 12 2016 11:24 AMSomething’s Odd About the Political Betting MarketsBrexit, Trump—the once-reliable prediction markets have misfired of late. Here’s why.
Science
Jan. 19 2016 8:00 AMThe Power of the “Power Pose”Amy Cuddy’s famous finding is the latest example of scientific overreach.
Science
May 8 2014 11:19 AMThe Paradox of RacismWhy the new book by the New York Times’ Nicholas Wade is both plausible and preposterous.