Errata
In Thinking Through Statistics, I made the strong argument that we all need to be better about admitting to mistakes. Fortunately, then, I made some insanely embarrassing ones.
Page 26: I dropped Kathleen Carley from the list of inspirational mathematical sociologists. Sorry about that! And Carter was her student, not Pattison's.
Page 60: I reversed the words independent and
dependent! The figure on the next page is right, and
this should read: "A reasonable
rule of thumb is that when we have some sort of bounding
of a dependent variable, looking at categories set up
according to values of the dependent
variable leads to
U-shaped pattern of slopes, while looking at categories
set up according to values of the independent
variable leads to
inverted-U-shaped
pattern of slopes."
Page 85: I write here about looking between the two vertical lines in Figure 3.3 There are no vertical lines. Don't know what happened to them. Just put two lines on the page, around x = 40 and x = 60.
Page 86: It hilariously reads that the average yearly fertility for women 20-35 is around 1%. I dropped a digit: the yearly rate is more like 10%, and its been getting less flat--younger women since 2000 have been having fewer babies.
Page 107: I noted that I was having trouble finding
Converse's reply to Achen. Well, that's because it
doesn't exist -- Converse was replying to the later work
of Judd and Milburn, as has been pointed out to me by Turgut Keskinturk. It was
Page 285: This is the worst of all! Formula 9.2 is wrong: I meant to say that the probability of any pattern is the sum of the products of the (weighted) conditional probabilities--not the production of the sum! I made this mistake when I had removed my brain for cleaning.
