If "chatting" one time is the extent of the contribution, no, IMO. A footnote or acknowledgment would be appropriate, however. And of course they should discuss it with you to make sure you have an understanding.

https://twitter.com/einsley23/status/1588290772507316224

And yes, as others have said, it shouldn't wait till the paper is written to discuss - if you have time and inclination you could become a coauthor and work on it together.

What if someone wrote a book like What If but for sociology questions What if Elon Musk evenly divided his net worth and gave everyone on earth $28.46?

On the first Friday of every month the government releases employment statistics, and a whole apparatus of economist commentary swings into action. There are op-eds, blogs, news interviews, Twitter threads. Economists have an infrastructure for commenting on current events... /1 ...enabled, of course, by a media establishment that includes many economists, but also major business interests that want to know what they think. Still, even without that infrastructure, sociologists could learn from this. /2

José Merino @PPmerino wants to appeal the decision to withdraw his paper from @SocArXiv. This is just noise. /1 As we explained previously (socopen.org/2021/12/08/whe…), SocArXiv does not do peer review. We aren't a journal. The fact that a paper is on our system does not mean it is scientifically sound. /2

Last few days have been a crash course in online Mexico City covid politics discourse. Sadly, I have to read most replies in translation, and much is lost (including time). I wonder why US news media haven't covered what to me is a remarkable story...

https://twitter.com/familyunequal/status/1489756059329777664

The government of Mexico City gave hundreds of thousands of people with COVID-19 ivermectin, without informing them it was experimental or doing any basic experimental protocols. I don't see any English language news covering this.

OK, the talk is close enough to polish by 11 in the morning. Looking forward to it! Been learning a lot about responses to parasites among nonhumans and humans.

https://twitter.com/familyunequal/status/1461464824378966018

And the many variations in societal response the pandemic, with emphasis on the US disaster.

Thinking back to Bernadette Powell, the Black woman in Ithaca brutally abused for years by her husband, who, after being abducted and held prisoner, managed to get his gun and kill him. The jury ignored her claim of self-defense and sent her to prison. washingtonpost.com/archive/local/… The prosecutor and a key witness both had documented records of spousal abuse. He suggested in the trial that the abuse reported over all those years, including to the police and hospital many times, was actually masochism on her part.

In the ongoing debate over including Asians or Asian Americans in "people of color" admission statistics, a recurring important theme is diversity and inequality within the category used. This is true for all "race" or ethnic groups, but especially so for Asians. /1 Another issue is the question of underrepresentedness, which has to do with who you count as Asian, and what your benchmark representation is. "Asians" may not be underrepresented overall, but Southeast Asians may be, for example. /2

people are still using this image to argue about counting Asian people in admissions. It's an important issue. Universities do many bad and racist things, including against many Asians. Just wish folks would argue about something more real than this, on someone else's timeline.

https://twitter.com/familyunequal/status/1458561051964891138

Not my statistics, not my chart, I don't do undergrad admissions. It's the president of the university's chart. Respect to all anti-antiAsian-racists.

Some charts for today's (in-person) talk: The Pandemic and the Family (you can guess the story I'll tell between these)

The General Social Survey was administered in Dec 2020 to May 2021, mostly in a new web format. The data is new, and caution is warranted before treating its findings as news. Before showing what follows, I looked for ways it could be messed up, and didn't find any. But still. If the data are reliable as currently reported, there was a very big swing in the direction of confidence in the scientific community, but only among some groups: Especially liberals, Democrats, non-church people. That's one of the reasons I think it might not be a data fluke.

Pandemic's cutting room floor: haven't adjusted the y-axis on this figure for a while. Fvck These curves are horrific

15 states hit new #COVID19 7-day case highs today. Positivity rates are insane, 11 states over 15% for the last two weeks

You had one job. "He'll close down the country"

Update on married man-woman couple height differences. My previous blog posts, and both books, reported this from 2009 PSID. Here is an update from 2017. This is the height of men and women in 4,666 couples
1/ How do these men and women match up? In the couples, 93.1% have a taller man, and the median height difference is 6.
2/

Trump arrived after two generations of American conservatives losing trust in science. Here’s the percent expressing a “great deal” of confidence in the scientific community, by political views: 1974-2016 (with
three-survey averages), from the General Social Survey /1 Here that is by decade, with controls for age, sex, race, class, education, and religious practice. Conservatives used to have the highest confidence in science, now lowest /2

Reporters like to ask researchers, “What surprised you in this research?” It’s understandable, because the researcher’s prepared remarks are probably boring. But it’s unfortunate and I think we need a better way. 1/ The problem is we’re not usually trying to be surprised by our research, and if we are it’s usually not in a good way — it’s either a bad result or an unexpected result that we feel pressured to explain 2/

Here is a list of factual errors in Jonah Goldberg's @JonahNRO book, Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy. In no particular order: 1/ The United States does not have more forest area than the entire world (p. 367) 2/