pols 205 political science as a social science …3 review for final exam chris adolph (uw) music...

POLS 205Political Science as a Social Science

Music Preference Model Results

Christopher Adolph

University of Washington, Seattle

June 2, 2010

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 1 / 44

1 Explanatory ModelsI ModelsI Out of Sample PerformanceI Substantive ResultsI Summary & Critique

2 Predictive ModelsI ModelsI Out of Sample Performance

3 Review for Final Exam

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 2 / 44

Explanatory Models Models

−0.001to

0.11

0.11to

0.222

0.222to

0.333

0.333to

0.444

0.444to

0.556

0.556to

0.667

0.667to

0.778

0.778to

0.89

0.89to1

black

Res

iden

ceIn

stru

men

tR

ace

Reg

ion

Par

ents

Rel

igio

usP

arty

Mal

eD

ensi

ty

Team 6Team 5Team 7Team 3Team 2Team 1Team 4Team 9Team 8

Adolph PostAdolph Prior

9 Groups, and 9 differentexplanatory variables indifferent combinations

Which models best predictthe out of sample data?

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 3 / 44

Explanatory Models Models

−0.001to

0.11

0.11to

0.222

0.222to

0.333

0.333to

0.444

0.444to

0.556

0.556to

0.667

0.667to

0.778

0.778to

0.89

0.89to1

black

Res

iden

ceIn

stru

men

tR

ace

Reg

ion

Par

ents

Rel

igio

usP

arty

Mal

eD

ensi

ty

Team 6Team 5Team 7Team 3Team 2Team 1Team 4Team 9Team 8

Adolph PostAdolph Prior

9 Groups, and 9 differentexplanatory variables indifferent combinations

Which models best predictthe out of sample data?

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 3 / 44

Explanatory Models Out of Sample Performance

Out of sample tests

Amanda reserved 100 observations, randomly selected

How do our models estimated on the remaining training observations predictthe left-out data?

Use the model to fit the probability that each left-out individual prefers eachgenre

Call the most likely category the model prediction

Calculate the percent of cases correctly predicted

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 4 / 44

Explanatory Models Out of Sample Performance

0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45

Proportion Correctly Predicted (out of sample)

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

Models ranked by out ofsample prediction

The dashed linecorresponds to predictingeveryone prefers rock, themodal category in thetraining sample

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 5 / 44

Explanatory Models Out of Sample Performance

0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45

Proportion Correctly Predicted (out of sample)

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

Models ranked by out ofsample prediction

The dashed linecorresponds to predictingeveryone prefers rock, themodal category in thetraining sample

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 5 / 44

Explanatory Models Out of Sample Performance

0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45

Proportion Correctly Predicted (out of sample)

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

How is our performance?

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 6 / 44

Explanatory Models Out of Sample Performance

0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45

Proportion Correctly Predicted (out of sample)

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

One challenge: our testdataset differs more thanwe might expect

pop rap rocktrain 24% 30% 46%test 22 40 38

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 7 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Parents’ Preferences

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Parents Prefer Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1.5x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 8 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Parents’ Preferences

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Parents Prefer Rap

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1.5x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 9 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Parents’ Preferences

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Parents Prefer Pop

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1.5x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 10 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Density

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Urban

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 11 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Density

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Rural

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 12 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Density

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Suburban

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 13 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Region

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Northwest

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 14 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Region

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Other West

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 15 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Region

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Midwest

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 16 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Region

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

South

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 17 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Region

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Outside US

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 18 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Residence

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Dorms

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 19 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Residence

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Greek Housing

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x1x1.5x2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 20 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Residence

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Off−campus Housing

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1.5x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 21 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Party

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Democrat

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 22 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Party

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Republican

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 23 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Party

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Independent

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 24 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Party

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Other Party

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 25 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Religious Days

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Religious Days = 0

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1.5x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 26 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Religious Days

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Religious Days = 4

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1.5x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 27 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Religious Days

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Religious Days = 12

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1.5x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 28 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Musical Instrument

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

No Instrument

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x1x1.5x2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 29 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Musical Instrument

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Plays Instrument

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x1x1.5x2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 30 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Gender

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Female

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 31 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Gender

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Male

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 32 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Race

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

White

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 33 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Race

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Black

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 34 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Race

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Hisp

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 35 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Race

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Asian

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8

Team 9

Team 5

Adolph post

Adolph prior

Team 4

Team 1

Team 3

Team 6

Team 7

Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 36 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Race

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

Native American

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x1x1.5x2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 37 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Race

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

None given

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 38 / 44

Explanatory Models Substantive Results

Race

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rap

More than one

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x 1x 1.5x 2x

Rock

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

0.5x1x1.5x2x

Pop

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

● ● ●

Team 8Team 9Team 5

Adolph postAdolph prior

Team 4Team 1Team 3Team 6Team 7Team 2

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 39 / 44

Explanatory Models Summary & Critique

Summary of Substantive Results

Mostly consistent but modest results across models

Probability of liking Rock rises for Whites, musicians, Males, and maybe otherwest & off campus

Probability of liking Rock falls for Blacks, Asians, Females, City-dwellers,Greek Housing, and possibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap rises for Parents, Blacks, Asians, City-Dwellers, andpossibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap falls for Whites & maybe Other West

Probability of liking Pop rises for Parents, Females, Asians, Greek Housing

Probability of liking Pop falls for Males, Musicians, Off-campus housing, andmaybe Blacks

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 40 / 44

Explanatory Models Summary & Critique

Summary of Substantive Results

Mostly consistent but modest results across models

Probability of liking Rock rises for Whites, musicians, Males, and maybe otherwest & off campus

Probability of liking Rock falls for Blacks, Asians, Females, City-dwellers,Greek Housing, and possibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap rises for Parents, Blacks, Asians, City-Dwellers, andpossibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap falls for Whites & maybe Other West

Probability of liking Pop rises for Parents, Females, Asians, Greek Housing

Probability of liking Pop falls for Males, Musicians, Off-campus housing, andmaybe Blacks

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 40 / 44

Explanatory Models Summary & Critique

Summary of Substantive Results

Mostly consistent but modest results across models

Probability of liking Rock rises for Whites, musicians, Males, and maybe otherwest & off campus

Probability of liking Rock falls for Blacks, Asians, Females, City-dwellers,Greek Housing, and possibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap rises for Parents, Blacks, Asians, City-Dwellers, andpossibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap falls for Whites & maybe Other West

Probability of liking Pop rises for Parents, Females, Asians, Greek Housing

Probability of liking Pop falls for Males, Musicians, Off-campus housing, andmaybe Blacks

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 40 / 44

Explanatory Models Summary & Critique

Summary of Substantive Results

Mostly consistent but modest results across models

Probability of liking Rock rises for Whites, musicians, Males, and maybe otherwest & off campus

Probability of liking Rock falls for Blacks, Asians, Females, City-dwellers,Greek Housing, and possibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap rises for Parents, Blacks, Asians, City-Dwellers, andpossibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap falls for Whites & maybe Other West

Probability of liking Pop rises for Parents, Females, Asians, Greek Housing

Probability of liking Pop falls for Males, Musicians, Off-campus housing, andmaybe Blacks

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 40 / 44

Explanatory Models Summary & Critique

Summary of Substantive Results

Mostly consistent but modest results across models

Probability of liking Rock rises for Whites, musicians, Males, and maybe otherwest & off campus

Probability of liking Rock falls for Blacks, Asians, Females, City-dwellers,Greek Housing, and possibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap rises for Parents, Blacks, Asians, City-Dwellers, andpossibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap falls for Whites & maybe Other West

Probability of liking Pop rises for Parents, Females, Asians, Greek Housing

Probability of liking Pop falls for Males, Musicians, Off-campus housing, andmaybe Blacks

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 40 / 44

Explanatory Models Summary & Critique

Summary of Substantive Results

Mostly consistent but modest results across models

Probability of liking Rock rises for Whites, musicians, Males, and maybe otherwest & off campus

Probability of liking Rock falls for Blacks, Asians, Females, City-dwellers,Greek Housing, and possibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap rises for Parents, Blacks, Asians, City-Dwellers, andpossibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap falls for Whites & maybe Other West

Probability of liking Pop rises for Parents, Females, Asians, Greek Housing

Probability of liking Pop falls for Males, Musicians, Off-campus housing, andmaybe Blacks

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 40 / 44

Explanatory Models Summary & Critique

Summary of Substantive Results

Mostly consistent but modest results across models

Probability of liking Rock rises for Whites, musicians, Males, and maybe otherwest & off campus

Probability of liking Rock falls for Blacks, Asians, Females, City-dwellers,Greek Housing, and possibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap rises for Parents, Blacks, Asians, City-Dwellers, andpossibly Hispanics & Republicans

Probabililty of liking Rap falls for Whites & maybe Other West

Probability of liking Pop rises for Parents, Females, Asians, Greek Housing

Probability of liking Pop falls for Males, Musicians, Off-campus housing, andmaybe Blacks

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 40 / 44

Explanatory Models Summary & Critique

Critique

Do you believe or doubt our results?

Which of the following may be problems, and why?

Selection biasOmitted variable biasEndoegneity / reverse causationMeasurement errorUnreliable measurementSpurrious correlation

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 41 / 44

Explanatory Models Summary & Critique

Critique

Do you believe or doubt our results?

Which of the following may be problems, and why?

Selection biasOmitted variable biasEndoegneity / reverse causationMeasurement errorUnreliable measurementSpurrious correlation

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 41 / 44

Predictive Models Models

−0.001to

0.11

0.11to

0.222

0.222to

0.333

0.333to

0.444

0.444to

0.556

0.556to

0.667

0.667to

0.778

0.778to

0.89

0.89to1

black

Spo

rts

TV

Par

ents

Bic

ycle

Inst

rum

ent

Res

iden

ceR

ace

Par

tyR

elig

ious

Reg

ion

Trus

tM

ovie

sG

roce

ryM

ale

Den

sity

Adolph PriorAdolph Post

Team 7Team 8Team 9Team 6Team 5Team 2Team 3Team 1Team 4

9 Groups, and 15 differentexplanatory variables indifferent combinations

Which models best predictthe out of sample data?

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 42 / 44

Predictive Models Models

−0.001to

0.11

0.11to

0.222

0.222to

0.333

0.333to

0.444

0.444to

0.556

0.556to

0.667

0.667to

0.778

0.778to

0.89

0.89to1

black

Spo

rts

TV

Par

ents

Bic

ycle

Inst

rum

ent

Res

iden

ceR

ace

Par

tyR

elig

ious

Reg

ion

Trus

tM

ovie

sG

roce

ryM

ale

Den

sity

Adolph PriorAdolph Post

Team 7Team 8Team 9Team 6Team 5Team 2Team 3Team 1Team 4

9 Groups, and 15 differentexplanatory variables indifferent combinations

Which models best predictthe out of sample data?

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 42 / 44

Predictive Models Out of Sample Performance

0.38 0.4 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.48

Proportion Correctly Predicted (out of sample)

Team 4

Team 3

Team 2

Adolph prior

Team 8

Adolph post

Team 1

Team 6

Team 5

Team 9

Team 7

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

Models ranked by out ofsample prediction

The dashed linecorresponds to predictingeveryone prefers rock, themodal category in thetraining sample

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 43 / 44

Predictive Models Out of Sample Performance

0.38 0.4 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.48

Proportion Correctly Predicted (out of sample)

Team 4

Team 3

Team 2

Adolph prior

Team 8

Adolph post

Team 1

Team 6

Team 5

Team 9

Team 7

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

Models ranked by out ofsample prediction

The dashed linecorresponds to predictingeveryone prefers rock, themodal category in thetraining sample

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 43 / 44

Predictive Models Out of Sample Performance

Congratulations!

Congratulations to Groups 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, and 9!

Each of these groups beat the predictions of one of my models

Each of these groups will receive 5% extra credit on the final exam

Chris Adolph (UW) Music Preferences June 2, 2010 44 / 44