tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558726.post116235425129416851..comments2024-02-20T17:40:21.618-05:00Comments on jeremy freese's weblog: twenty-four stories of internal-external causationjeremyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12755662766163119607noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558726.post-1162518001105194752006-11-02T20:40:00.000-05:002006-11-02T20:40:00.000-05:00random: could you put the decision to get plastic ...random: could you put the decision to get plastic surgery through model?Tom Volschohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08590808812171721637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558726.post-1162516393963870552006-11-02T20:13:00.000-05:002006-11-02T20:13:00.000-05:00Although I suppose this is a completely predictabl...Although I suppose this is a completely predictable response, I fail to see why you haven't simply adopted a counterfactual model completely. <BR/><BR/>Why not (1) set-up a population stratified by genotype, (2) attach potential outcomes to different states of the environment, and (3) argue for between-strata differences in the causal effects of the environment. It would all be doubly fun with strata further subdivided into a second set of genotypes, at which point inteventions on the environment could produce even more than your 8 cases.<BR/><BR/>All that being said, what you have presented seems clear enough to me, such that a full-blown potential outcome treatment may not be worth the additional effort.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558726.post-1162448164661528432006-11-02T01:16:00.000-05:002006-11-02T01:16:00.000-05:00I sort of dashed off the brief verbal descriptions...I sort of dashed off the brief verbal descriptions of what I meant by the different diagrams. I think you are right with the 1 and 2, maybe I can recast my verbal descriptions to always be consistent in terms of #2 by thinking of (a) is being about the environmental cause being inert. I'll need to look back at how those neuron diagrams looked, as I certainly don't remember.jeremyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12755662766163119607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558726.post-1162443160527569542006-11-01T23:52:00.000-05:002006-11-01T23:52:00.000-05:00are those the diagrams with the filled and empty c...<I>are those the diagrams with the filled and empty circles and arrows in the Collins, Hall, and Paul book?</I><BR/><BR/>Yes. That style is good for tracing kinds of causal dependence. The more I think about it the more I think you are trying to show two different things here. <BR/><BR/>1) Kinds of causal dependence between entities -- i.e., does G always get expressed regardless of E and vice versa. Do they have a linearly additive effect. Does one make the effect of the other a bit smaller. Etc. In this case you don't really need to represent the genes and the environment (or actions) as nested, you could just show different antecedent circles and their effect on the outcome. Your (a) (b) (c) (f) and (g) are cases under this heading. Introducing two Gs (G1, G2) only makes it more complex.<BR/><BR/>2) The effect of an intervention in E on the expression of different Gs. E.g., Does E have the same effect on G1 and G2? Your (e) and (h) are cases under this heading. Two Gs are required for these cases.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558726.post-1162440492761890412006-11-01T23:08:00.000-05:002006-11-01T23:08:00.000-05:00Kieran:I fixed the red line on my slide (though di...Kieran:<BR/><BR/>I fixed the red line on my slide (though didn't upload) and rectified the Baby Jesus problem. As for the neuron diagrams, are those the diagrams with the filled and empty circles and arrows in the Collins, Hall, and Paul book?jeremyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12755662766163119607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558726.post-1162439769705757882006-11-01T22:56:00.000-05:002006-11-01T22:56:00.000-05:001. The lower line in (b) should be blue. 2. Labeli...1. The lower line in (b) should be blue. <BR/><BR/>2. Labeling the plots (a) ... (h) and the key (1) ... (8) made baby Jesus cry. <BR/><BR/>3. I think this representation is too complex, and somewhat confusing because it mixes a number of different things together. You're partly taxonomizing the way some external context affects the action or expression of some causal mechanism (eg in a and b). But you're also trying to show that the context can have independent effects too (e.g. in c). This is further complicated by using two lines, trying to show how a context can have <I>contrasting</I> effects on <I>different</I> causal mechanisms. All this makes the relationship between the lines and the E and E' labels hard to interpet, because in some panels their natural interpretation is Before/After and in others it's Case 1 and Case 2. Really you need to show <I>both</I> the "gene" effects and the "environment" effects as vectors with a third representation of the outcome. Something more like the so-called 'neuron diagrams' in the literature on causal counterfactuals, though not with the same interpretation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558726.post-1162417782687137872006-11-01T16:49:00.000-05:002006-11-01T16:49:00.000-05:00awesome!!! Keep truckin' on this.awesome!!! Keep truckin' on this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558726.post-1162381177219574352006-11-01T06:39:00.000-05:002006-11-01T06:39:00.000-05:00I am starting to get the feeling that you are on a...I am starting to get the feeling that you are on a trajectory such that, 10 years from now when I see you at the ASA, I will whisper to my friends that I used to know you when you were just a Harvard postdoc. Maybe I will pop into the business meeting of the Freesian Sociogenetics section and sit in the back row.tinahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09184217798022197795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5558726.post-1162366282451196572006-11-01T02:31:00.000-05:002006-11-01T02:31:00.000-05:00Even if you replace people with cells that you can...Even if you replace people with cells that you can manipulate without worrying about IRB approval, those are very hard questions to answer.<BR/>I hadn't thought about it like that before, but I like that there's a kind of self-similarity between levels.<BR/>I'm very interested in hearing how you could connect causes and effects on such different scales.Lucyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09150532491859766021noreply@blogger.com