Michael Norton: How to buy happiness

Logistic regression In statistics, logistic regression, or logit regression, or logit model[1] is a type of probabilistic statistical classification model.[2] It is also used to predict a binary response from a binary predictor, used for predicting the outcome of a categorical dependent variable (i.e., a class label) based on one or more predictor variables (features). That is, it is used in estimating the parameters of a qualitative response model. The probabilities describing the possible outcomes of a single trial are modeled, as a function of the explanatory (predictor) variables, using a logistic function. Logistic regression can be seen as a special case of generalized linear model and thus analogous to linear regression. follows a Bernoulli distribution rather than a Gaussian distribution, because logistic regression is a classifier. is restricted to [0,1] through the logistic distribution function because logistic regression predicts the probability of the instance being positive. Basics[edit] If

The Christian Science Monitor The Paradox of Choice: A theory loses favor Does your brain freeze when offered too many options? Do you put off repainting your bathroom because you can’t bear to select among fifty shades of white (or, for the more adventurous, grey)? Skip to next paragraph Donald Marron Donald B. Recent posts Subscribe Today to the Monitor Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS ofThe Christian Science MonitorWeekly Digital Edition If so, take heart. That makes no sense in the narrow sense of rationality often used in simple economic models. This result resonates with many people. Today’s TED Blog provides links and, naturally, videos for a series of studies documenting similar challenges of choice, from retirement planning to health care to spaghetti sauce. But how general are these results? It is hard to find much evidence that retailers are ferociously simplifying their offerings in an effort to boost sales. But a curious thing happened almost immediately. In short, the Paradox of Choice is experiencing the infamous Decline Effect.

Following the Money, but Also the Mind IN the histories of economics still to be written, the spring of 1994 will almost certainly be flagged as momentous. That is when an ophthalmologist's son from Main Line Philadelphia -- David Laibson -- received his Ph.D. in economics, qualifying with a thesis about willpower and money that drew as much on psychology and quirky behavior as on standard economics. Harvard quickly hired him, becoming the first university to deliberately recruit an economics professor trained as a behavioral economist. Behavioral economics had finally arrived: a discipline that for a half-century had built its theories on the rigid assumption that people acted with rational, unemotional self-interest had formally recognized that human beings had another, feisty, side to them. Three years later, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology followed Harvard's lead, hiring Sendhil Mullainathan just after he earned his Ph.D. Mr. Their reputations have been on the rise ever since.

The Honest Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone - Especially Ourselves: Amazon.co.uk: Dan Ariely I find Dan Ariely's books to be enjoyable, enlightening and mildly annoying, in equal measures. The mildly annoying bit is surely unfair (and unreasonable) of me. I do tend to find Ariely's determinedly jaunty tone a bit wearying: he writes as if his readers were a pleasant but especially dim-witted intake of undergraduates. This is probably the secret of his publishing success: as the great H. Ariely, to be fair, sets out to write popular science, and he succeeds admirably, although - as ever with the genre - some of the science gets lost in amongst the popularisation. All that said, this is a jolly and informative romp through some genuinely interesting current psychological thinking, entertainingly and readably presented. I do, however, have a few gripes. I also wonder what Ariely is even thinking of when he says 'So where do we stand on self-deception? But I wouldn't be making these moans and gripes if Ariely's book hadn't set me off on a number of trains of thought.

גולף ומוסר מאת דן אריאלי יש סצנה בסרט "משחק החיים" שבה מאט דיימון, המגלם את דמותו של רנולף ג'ונו, מנסה להחזיר לעצמו את תהילתו האבודה במשחק גולף אבל עושה טעות איומה והכדור שלו מתגלגל אל בין העצים. אחרי שהוא מצליח להחזיר את הכדור לאזור ה"גרין", ג'ונו מזיז ענף קטן שמוטל על הארץ, ליד הכדור, כדי ליצור לעצמו נתיב חבטה פתוח ונוח, אבל כשהוא מרים את הענף הכדור זז טיפה, בכמה מילימטרים. לפי חוקי המשחק, ג'ונו צריך להחשיב את התזוזה הזאת כחבטה. בשלב זה של התחרות, ג'ונו מוביל בפער מספיק גדול, כך שאם יתעלם מהעובדה שהכדור זז הוא יוכל לנצח, לעשות קאמבק מזהיר ולהשיב לעצמו את תהילתו האבודה. נושא הכלים הצעיר שלו מתחנן בפניו בדמעות שיתעלם מהתזוזה הקטנה של הכדור: "זאת היתה תאונה," הוא אומר. "וזה חוק דבילי בכל מקרה. בסוף התחרות, כשכתבי העיתונות התנפלו עליו, הוא ביקש מהם לא לכתוב על זה אף מילה: "באותה מידה אתם יכולים לשבח אותי על כך שאני לא שודד בנקים." בגולף, בניגוד לענפי ספורט אחרים, אין שופטים או בוררים שתפקידם להקפיד על חוקי המשחק או לקבל הכרעה ברגעים שנויים במחלוקת. עטיפת הספר אבל קשה מאוד להגדיר בדיוק מה זה "הוגן". להזיז את הכדור

Worried Sick Something strange was happening in New Zealand. In the fall of 2007, pharmacies across the country had begun dispensing a new formulation of Eltroxin—the only thyroid hormone replacement drug approved and paid for by the government and used by tens of thousands of New Zealanders since 1973. Within months, reports of side effects began trickling in to the government’s health-care monitoring agency. These included known side effects of the drug, such as lethargy, joint pain, and depression, as well as symptoms not normally associated with the drug or disease, including eye pain, itching, and nausea. Then, the following summer, the floodgates opened: in the 18 months following the release of the new tablets, the rate of Eltroxin adverse event reporting rose nearly 2,000-fold.1 The strange thing was, the active ingredient in the drug, thyroxine, was exactly the same. So why were people getting sick? “Nocebo” (meaning “I shall harm”) is the dastardly sibling of placebo (“I shall please”). K.