Comments on: e-Readiness: how aggregates forget inequality http://ictlogy.net/20080318-e-readiness-how-aggregates-forget-inequality/ Information Society, Digital Divide, ICT4D Sun, 05 Feb 2012 21:25:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: BibCiter v1.0: gestor bibliográfico con plugin para WordPress < otro blog más http://ictlogy.net/20080318-e-readiness-how-aggregates-forget-inequality/comment-page-1/#comment-64765 BibCiter v1.0: gestor bibliográfico con plugin para WordPress < otro blog más Sun, 20 Apr 2008 19:44:31 +0000 http://ictlogy.net/20080318-e-readiness-how-aggregates-forget-inequality/#comment-64765 [...] La principal novedad de esta nueva versión (la 1.1) es que permite sacar también un plugin para WordPress de forma que sea relativamente fácil introducir citas bibliográficas de obras que tenemos en nuestra instalación de BibCiter. Como ejemplos, mirad las referencias que aparecen en el final de esta página o de esta otra. [...]

]]> By: Ismael Peña-López http://ictlogy.net/20080318-e-readiness-how-aggregates-forget-inequality/comment-page-1/#comment-64061 Ismael Peña-López Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:40:24 +0000 http://ictlogy.net/20080318-e-readiness-how-aggregates-forget-inequality/#comment-64061 Hi Caitlin, Yes, I did remove the outliers (Bolivia, Lesotho, Namibia). As you can see in the following figure, things don't change too much. <div align="middle"> <a href="/img/posts/0000000696d.png" rel="nofollow"> <img src="/img/posts/0000000696d_thumb.png" border=0 width="400" alt="NRI-Inequality graphic"/> <small>[click to enlarge]</small></a> </div> A little bit forced, but you could draw two lines in the shape of an inverted "V": one almost vertical, for those countries with inequalities under 10, and another one - similar to the regression straight lines in figures above - that very very slightly seems to provide evidence about growing e-readiness when inequality is reduced. The vertical line would said almost nothing: inequality is not a factor in e-readiness, which I believe cannot be true unless we are doing a measure for elites alone. And the other line brings out R<sup>2</sup> values still way under 0.1 (see that the R<sup>2</sup> calculated here have values circa 0.08, not 0.8, which would be quite a finding). I've also tried removing more and more countries so the reality does not spoil a good story ;) but the results are still the same. Hi Caitlin,

Yes, I did remove the outliers (Bolivia, Lesotho, Namibia). As you can see in the following figure, things don’t change too much.

A little bit forced, but you could draw two lines in the shape of an inverted “V”: one almost vertical, for those countries with inequalities under 10, and another one – similar to the regression straight lines in figures above – that very very slightly seems to provide evidence about growing e-readiness when inequality is reduced.

The vertical line would said almost nothing: inequality is not a factor in e-readiness, which I believe cannot be true unless we are doing a measure for elites alone.

And the other line brings out R2 values still way under 0.1 (see that the R2 calculated here have values circa 0.08, not 0.8, which would be quite a finding).

I’ve also tried removing more and more countries so the reality does not spoil a good story ;) but the results are still the same.

]]> By: Caitlin http://ictlogy.net/20080318-e-readiness-how-aggregates-forget-inequality/comment-page-1/#comment-64045 Caitlin Mon, 24 Mar 2008 20:21:32 +0000 http://ictlogy.net/20080318-e-readiness-how-aggregates-forget-inequality/#comment-64045 Yes indeed, I would totally agree. I would even go further, and say that the problem precedes the model. These theories are not grounded in data that is coming from developing countries, or the people (as you mentioned) that are affected. There is an unmistakable value in qualitative research that is clearly missing in the ICT4D field. I have a question about your data analyses though (coming more as a curiosity, than a criticism), by the looks of your scatterplots for the e-readiness vs. inequality, just by looking at them, I feel that they don't look linear or logarithmic at all. There seem to be a few outliers that are skewing the data too. Why didn't you remove the outliers, and calculate pearson's r? In the social sciences, I thought that an r =< 0.3 was worth reporting. Maybe there is a relationship but it's just not easy to predict? Yes indeed, I would totally agree. I would even go further, and say that the problem precedes the model. These theories are not grounded in data that is coming from developing countries, or the people (as you mentioned) that are affected. There is an unmistakable value in qualitative research that is clearly missing in the ICT4D field.

I have a question about your data analyses though (coming more as a curiosity, than a criticism), by the looks of your scatterplots for the e-readiness vs. inequality, just by looking at them, I feel that they don’t look linear or logarithmic at all. There seem to be a few outliers that are skewing the data too. Why didn’t you remove the outliers, and calculate pearson’s r? In the social sciences, I thought that an r =< 0.3 was worth reporting. Maybe there is a relationship but it’s just not easy to predict?

]]>