Baghdad Murder Rate

Chris Lawrence defends Lott against the charge Wyeth made yesterday. James Joyner also comments.

Lawrence is correct when he points out that Lott's claims about Baghdad murders are not lies unless Lott knows them to be false, and, in the absence of reliable data we don't know whether they are false or true. However, what Lott did was write with reckless disregard for the truth. Rumsfeld was actually comparing combat deaths of US soldiers in Baghdad with murders in Washington, DC, so Lott had absolutely no basis for his claim. The important point for someone reading Lott is that any event, you should not believe anything he writes unless you have an independent source for it.

Lawrence also writes:

Indeed. And, that would be a worthwhile critique of Lott's analysis, which gets to the whole "causal mechanism" thing I discussed above. The best I can say for Lott (if you accept his claims about the dispensation of the survey data, which I find dubious but not entirely improbable) is that he's a sloppy social scientist---albeit perhaps not an not extraordinarily sloppy one, given the pure sludge that often is passed off as strong evidence in many peer-reviewed journals.

\* Lott's missing data only affects a small part of his overall argument; it may speak to his overall credibility, but the vast majority of his data is available and has been analyzed by other scholars.

And when Ayers and Donohue analysed that data they found systematic coding errors, which, when corrected, caused his results to go away. Lott still will not admit to the errors or deny them.

Tags

More like this

Lott responds on his blog to Wyeth's accusation that he had no evidence for his claim about Baghdad murders. (My earlier comments are here.) Notice that Lott responds on a minor point, once again ducking the question of the coding errors. And while he links to Wyeth and responds to…
Tom Spencer finds Lott's misrepresentation of Duwe et al hilarious. The Wyeth Wire takes Lott to task for his completely unsupported claim that Baghdad has fewer murders than Washington DC. Of course, Lott's defence will be that he was just reporting Donald Rumsfeld's…
Keneth Miles describes Lott and Lehrer's claims that crime increased in Washington DC after the gun ban as an excellent example of cherry picking. Earlier, I observed that the only justification Lott offered for another claim he made about DC crime, that Baghdad had fewer…
In my previous entry on the Baghdad murder rate I noted that pretty well every paper that had reported the Baghdad murder rate had given a vastly higher figure than Lott's number and the only paper out of step was the Wall Street Journal. So, in Lott's 11/19/03 entry on his…