One more quote from yesterday's Chronicle of Higher Education article:
Mr. Lott also points out that because the claim of coding errors appears in a law review, it has not been subject to review by third-party scholars, as would have been the case in a peer-reviewed economics journal.
It has been weeks since Lott saw the claim of coding errors. It would have taken him a few minutes to check for the existence of the errors and not much longer to see if correcting the errors reverses his results as Ayres and Donohue claim. He must know full well whether or not the claim is true. So, who cares if the claim has been reviewed by third-party scholars? It's been reviewed by Lott. Does he concede the claim or is he going to deny it?
More like this
A study by Kovandzic and Marvell has been published in July issue of Criminology and Public Policy. (A draft of their paper is here.) From the journal's news release about their findings:
In the recently published study "Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns: Crime Control through Gun…
David Glenn has an article (subscription required) in The Chronicle of Higher Education on the Ayres/Donohue/Lott dispute. Here are the responses from Lott and Whitley to the allegation of coding errors:
Mr. Lott replies that the alleged coding errors are irrelevant to the larger debate. "…
Lott has posted some criticism of Chris Mooney's article.
Let's see how many errors he has successfully identified:
1) Paraphrasing claim from the Chronicle of Higher Education stating that the "coding errors had not been reviewed by a third party." I was never asked by the…
Ayres and Donohue have sent a letter to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, replying to Lott's 21 July letter. I agree with their description of Lott's behaviour as dishonest.
On July 21, 2003, researcher John Lott wrote a letter to the editor in which he tried to shore up support for his now…