Philip N Cohen
@philipncohen.com
Sociologist and demographer, University of Maryland; director of SocArXiv. New book out! Citizen Scholar: Public Engagement for Social Scientists https://cup.columbia.edu/book/citizen-scholar/9780231555418
philipncohen.com
philipncohen.com
Here is the updated trend with most of the controls. In JSE I could say: although the absolute size of the gender gap in opposition to pornography has not grown, as both lines are trending toward zero the ratio of women's to men's opposition *is* increasing, so our theory is still correct. JSE!
/6
/6
November 10, 2025 at 3:22 PM
Here is the updated trend with most of the controls. In JSE I could say: although the absolute size of the gender gap in opposition to pornography has not grown, as both lines are trending toward zero the ratio of women's to men's opposition *is* increasing, so our theory is still correct. JSE!
/6
/6
Funny thing happened after 2012 (see figure). This is why wee need the Journal of Subsequent Events. The paper is still puttering along at half a dozen citations per year, and apparently no one noticed the trend changed. Why should I bother to tell you this, if it will only hurt me? JSE!
/4
/4
November 10, 2025 at 3:22 PM
Funny thing happened after 2012 (see figure). This is why wee need the Journal of Subsequent Events. The paper is still puttering along at half a dozen citations per year, and apparently no one noticed the trend changed. Why should I bother to tell you this, if it will only hurt me? JSE!
/4
/4
In 2015, Lucia Lykke and I published an analysis of GSS (through 2012) that showed US women were more likely than men to favor banning pornography, and the gap was widening. In our model, with control variables, the linear slope for men was steeper than for women. Here's the unadjusted trend:
/2
/2
November 10, 2025 at 3:22 PM
In 2015, Lucia Lykke and I published an analysis of GSS (through 2012) that showed US women were more likely than men to favor banning pornography, and the gap was widening. In our model, with control variables, the linear slope for men was steeper than for women. Here's the unadjusted trend:
/2
/2
A few of Copenhagen's dramatic statues
November 9, 2025 at 10:03 PM
A few of Copenhagen's dramatic statues
Today in Copenhagen: "People are disappearing. Fear and unrest are permeating the streets."
November 9, 2025 at 8:33 AM
Today in Copenhagen: "People are disappearing. Fear and unrest are permeating the streets."
Waiting for the followup
November 9, 2025 at 8:30 AM
Waiting for the followup
While I'm doing NSFW, these magnets are for sale all over town. They offer a choice which is also a subtle dig at Michelangelo's decision to depict David in Roman rather than Jewish style...
November 8, 2025 at 5:17 AM
While I'm doing NSFW, these magnets are for sale all over town. They offer a choice which is also a subtle dig at Michelangelo's decision to depict David in Roman rather than Jewish style...
I went to see the David statue this morning. It was quite moving. 500 years old! 3 years' labor and 8 tons of marble! Truly awe inspiring. I think my picture is good enough for my memory, but just in case I have some backups, too.
November 7, 2025 at 1:46 PM
I went to see the David statue this morning. It was quite moving. 500 years old! 3 years' labor and 8 tons of marble! Truly awe inspiring. I think my picture is good enough for my memory, but just in case I have some backups, too.
Looking at the Pietà in the Galleria dell'Accademia in Florence, a young boy asked his mother, "Is he dead?"
"It looks that way."
"Why is he dead?"
"We don't know, we just have to think about it with our minds."
Do your own research, kid.
"It looks that way."
"Why is he dead?"
"We don't know, we just have to think about it with our minds."
Do your own research, kid.
November 7, 2025 at 11:06 AM
Looking at the Pietà in the Galleria dell'Accademia in Florence, a young boy asked his mother, "Is he dead?"
"It looks that way."
"Why is he dead?"
"We don't know, we just have to think about it with our minds."
Do your own research, kid.
"It looks that way."
"Why is he dead?"
"We don't know, we just have to think about it with our minds."
Do your own research, kid.
Ya. The most cited paper in sociology since 2019 is this theory piece with no data.
Sad to see arXiv rely on journal review for verification, but you go to war with the weapons you have.
Sad to see arXiv rely on journal review for verification, but you go to war with the weapons you have.
November 2, 2025 at 6:58 PM
Ya. The most cited paper in sociology since 2019 is this theory piece with no data.
Sad to see arXiv rely on journal review for verification, but you go to war with the weapons you have.
Sad to see arXiv rely on journal review for verification, but you go to war with the weapons you have.
Sometimes the author lets the chatbot speak for itself. Handy!
November 2, 2025 at 3:37 PM
Sometimes the author lets the chatbot speak for itself. Handy!
Thanks! (And thanks for not just shaming me.) Just tried it. Pangram agrees my abstract is AI, but doesn't give the long explanation. It provides this table though:
November 2, 2025 at 2:46 PM
Thanks! (And thanks for not just shaming me.) Just tried it. Pangram agrees my abstract is AI, but doesn't give the long explanation. It provides this table though:
So, all that said, sometimes I ask ChatGPT whether a paper has been LLM-generated. Should I use a different method? Some other available tool? Very open to suggestions.
Here is what ChatGPT tells me about an abstract I showed it. It seems reasonable (So confident! So manly!), but is it true? /4
Here is what ChatGPT tells me about an abstract I showed it. It seems reasonable (So confident! So manly!), but is it true? /4
November 2, 2025 at 2:36 PM
So, all that said, sometimes I ask ChatGPT whether a paper has been LLM-generated. Should I use a different method? Some other available tool? Very open to suggestions.
Here is what ChatGPT tells me about an abstract I showed it. It seems reasonable (So confident! So manly!), but is it true? /4
Here is what ChatGPT tells me about an abstract I showed it. It seems reasonable (So confident! So manly!), but is it true? /4
Figure 1 with corrected label on y-axis:
November 1, 2025 at 10:27 PM
Figure 1 with corrected label on y-axis:
"My Grandma would want me to fight them." I have loved Lynda Barry cartoons for 40 years. Gift link:
www.nytimes.com/2025/10/31/o...
www.nytimes.com/2025/10/31/o...
November 1, 2025 at 9:04 PM
"My Grandma would want me to fight them." I have loved Lynda Barry cartoons for 40 years. Gift link:
www.nytimes.com/2025/10/31/o...
www.nytimes.com/2025/10/31/o...
How much does this cost? I previously noted children cost $17,660 per child per year in government services (thehill.com/opinion/immi...). Now add to that a lot of lost income from mothers who are less employed, and work in worse jobs for lower pay, after they have children. Here's mean incomes:
/2
/2
November 1, 2025 at 12:54 AM
How much does this cost? I previously noted children cost $17,660 per child per year in government services (thehill.com/opinion/immi...). Now add to that a lot of lost income from mothers who are less employed, and work in worse jobs for lower pay, after they have children. Here's mean incomes:
/2
/2
It's Friday night, Halloween! Who's with me for a thread about the economics of pronatalism?!
Some people say we need more babies because we don't have enough workers. But more births means less women workers, by ~15-40%. You trade workers today for workers tomorrow. This is from CPS data:
/1
Some people say we need more babies because we don't have enough workers. But more births means less women workers, by ~15-40%. You trade workers today for workers tomorrow. This is from CPS data:
/1
November 1, 2025 at 12:54 AM
It's Friday night, Halloween! Who's with me for a thread about the economics of pronatalism?!
Some people say we need more babies because we don't have enough workers. But more births means less women workers, by ~15-40%. You trade workers today for workers tomorrow. This is from CPS data:
/1
Some people say we need more babies because we don't have enough workers. But more births means less women workers, by ~15-40%. You trade workers today for workers tomorrow. This is from CPS data:
/1
Shot:
Lyman Stone: "None of the things proposed as pronatal policy in the US are *any* threat to women's empowerment! The reason it is brought up is pure political fear mongering."
Chaser:
Heritage: stop subsidizing education so women will stay home and have babies.
Lyman Stone: "None of the things proposed as pronatal policy in the US are *any* threat to women's empowerment! The reason it is brought up is pure political fear mongering."
Chaser:
Heritage: stop subsidizing education so women will stay home and have babies.
October 29, 2025 at 3:48 PM
Shot:
Lyman Stone: "None of the things proposed as pronatal policy in the US are *any* threat to women's empowerment! The reason it is brought up is pure political fear mongering."
Chaser:
Heritage: stop subsidizing education so women will stay home and have babies.
Lyman Stone: "None of the things proposed as pronatal policy in the US are *any* threat to women's empowerment! The reason it is brought up is pure political fear mongering."
Chaser:
Heritage: stop subsidizing education so women will stay home and have babies.
Last time I was onstage at Cornell, possibly in the same building, was about 1984 (as Jean-Paul Marat)
October 29, 2025 at 1:41 PM
Last time I was onstage at Cornell, possibly in the same building, was about 1984 (as Jean-Paul Marat)
Nothing like good old American (-first/-only) Christian morality: "There is no reason any of these residents of my state — or any other American who qualifies for food assistance — should go hungry."
October 28, 2025 at 12:24 PM
Nothing like good old American (-first/-only) Christian morality: "There is no reason any of these residents of my state — or any other American who qualifies for food assistance — should go hungry."
A human being wrote this, one ordered or approved it, and one put it online. They all just decided that burning in Hell isn't that bad compared with owning the libs.
October 27, 2025 at 10:45 PM
A human being wrote this, one ordered or approved it, and one put it online. They all just decided that burning in Hell isn't that bad compared with owning the libs.
I saw this Lime scooter dumped in the creek, little light still blinking, and imagine it talking like C3PO: "This is just unacceptable! How can I provide reliable transportation service if I am stuck at the bottom of this creek? I don't think Master Luke is going to be happy about this at all!"
October 27, 2025 at 2:49 AM
I saw this Lime scooter dumped in the creek, little light still blinking, and imagine it talking like C3PO: "This is just unacceptable! How can I provide reliable transportation service if I am stuck at the bottom of this creek? I don't think Master Luke is going to be happy about this at all!"
Emma Waters graduated from the "Christ-centered liberal arts college" Lee University, was a "young scholar" and research assistant at Institute for Family Studies, now a "research associate" at Heritage Foundation -- all of which apparently prepares a person to know the Baby Boom was in the 1970s.
October 26, 2025 at 6:37 PM
Emma Waters graduated from the "Christ-centered liberal arts college" Lee University, was a "young scholar" and research assistant at Institute for Family Studies, now a "research associate" at Heritage Foundation -- all of which apparently prepares a person to know the Baby Boom was in the 1970s.