Freakonomics Rev Ed: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything

by Steven D. Levitt, Stephen J. Dubner

book data

42,478 ratings, 3.80 average rating, 4,575 reviews (more data...)

rating	frequency	%
5		24%
4		40%
3		26%
2		5%
1		2%

edit

published

October 2nd 2006 (first published 2005) by William Morrow

binding

Hardcover, 242 pages

url

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/

isbn

0061234001 (isbn13: 9780061234002)

description

Which is more dangerous, a gun or a swimming pool? What do schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers have in common? Why do drug dealers still live with the...more

[close] Which is more dangerous, a gun or a swimming pool? What do schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers have in common? Why do drug dealers still live with their moms? How much do parents really matter? How did the legalization of abortion affect the rate of violent crime?

These may not sound like typical questions for an economist to ask. But Steven D. Levitt is not a typical economist. He is a much-heralded scholar who studies the riddles of everyday life--from cheating and crime to sports and child-rearing--and whose conclusions turn conventional wisdom on its head.

Freakonomics is a groundbreaking collaboration between Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, an award-winning author and journalist. They usually begin with a mountain of data and a simple question. Some of these questions concern life-and-death issues; others have an admittedly freakish quality. Thus the new field of study contained in this book: Freakonomics.

Through forceful storytelling and wry insight, Levitt and Dubner show that economics is, at root, the study of incentives--how people get what they want, or need, especially when other people want or need the same thing. In Freakonomics, they explore the hidden side of ... well, everything. The inner workings of a crack gang. The truth about real-estate agents. The myths of campaign finance. The telltale marks of a cheating schoolteacher. The secrets of the Ku Klux Klan.

What unites all these stories is a belief that the modern world, despite a great deal of complexity and downright deceit, is not impenetrable, is not unknowable, and--if the right questions are asked--is even more intriguing than we think. All it takes is a new way of looking.

Freakonomics establishes this unconventional premise: If morality represents how we would like the world to work, then economics represents how it actually does work. It is true that readers of this book will be armed with enough riddles and stories to last a thoughand cocktail parties. But Freakonomics can provide more than that. It will literally redefine the way we view the modern world. [close]

find at: Amazon | Half.com | Barnes & Noble | compare prices ($8.40)…

new topic
discuss this book

topics	posts	views	last activity
The Next Best Boo...: What are you reading?	13074	11033	1 minute ago
Romance Readers R...: A-Z Book Challenge	202	437	2 hours, 2 min ago
The Next Best Boo...: Books That Made You Think	22	142	23 hours, 47 min ago

friend reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

lists with this book

Best Books of the Decade: 2000's

625 books | 2325 voters

Best Non-Fiction (non biography)

278 books | 366 voters

More lists...

other reviews (showing 1-20 of 59,006)

sort: default (?) | date
filters: all | text-only

08/15/07

Reverend J. LeSchwes rated it:

recommends it for: People who want to laugh cynically at American stupidity... or stupid people

I enjoyed learning a few things about sumo wrestling and the Chicago public school system.

But apparently, the hidden side of everything remains pretty hidden to Levitt and Dubner.

Is this kind of laziness common among economists?

Or are they just assuming that only stupid people who want other "experts" to tell them about the hidden side of everything are going to read this- as opposed to people who are actually inquisitive and capable of doing math. ...more

Like this review? yes (18 people liked it)

1 comment

02/23/08

Jim rated it:

bookshelves: candy, economics

Read in January, 2007

This was an interesting book. I say it was interesting because I started liking it (a lot) when I first read it, as time passed I liked it less and less. In that way I call it a candy book, tastes good at first but leaves you worse off for reading it.

In my opinion, there are two problems with the book: First, Stephen Dubner comes across as a sycophant. Way to much of the book is spent praising Levitt. Secondly, I was disappointed in the lack of detail provided about Livitt's hypothe...more

Like this review? yes (12 people liked it)

add a comment

07/09/07

Justin rated it:

Read in July, 2007

recommends it for: People Who Appreciate the Value of Social Science

I guess some people don't like this book because it's not centered around one theme. Instead, it's more about the seemingly diffuse academic work of one of the authors Steven D. Levitt (the other author is a journalist, Stephen J. Dubner). Levitt is something of an economist but more like a social scientist using the tools of Microeconomics applied to other fields that happen to catch his interest (often having something to do with cheating, corruption, crime, etc.). In the back of the book he m...more I guess some people don't like this book because it's not centered around one theme. Instead, it's more about the seemingly diffuse academic work of one of the authors Steven D. Levitt (the other author is a journalist, Stephen J. Dubner). Levitt is something of an economist but more like a social scientist using the tools of Microeconomics applied to other fields that happen to catch his interest (often having something to do with cheating, corruption, crime, etc.). In the back of the book he mentions how he considers himself a student of Thomas Schelling who is kind of like the father of Game Theory (strategy theory?), except much more of a 'man of ideas' than what one might think of when one thinks about game theory today, which is much more mathematical.

Anyway, as for the book itself, I thought it was really great. I really like what Levitt is doing as far as using the tools of Microeconomics in other fields. One of my intellectual heroes (I only have a few) is Kenneth Waltz who did the exact same thing in the field of International Relations in the '70's and wrote the seminal book The Theory of International Politics, which pretty much the single-handedly invented defensive (neo) realism. More generally, I think Economics is probably the most formalized of the social sciences and the one to which others should esteem. A lot of the Political Science field concerned with both voter behavior and how legislatures work is now pretty formalized as well, and, I, for one, think this is a good thing. I don't see how anyone could think it's not (good) unless they a)think the scientific method cannot be used to analyze human behavior; or b)have a visceral aversion to mathematical languages. Actually, I am one of the latter, but I, at least, see the value in having a formalized language to work with.

As for the book itself, there's some maybe-controversial things in there like Levitt did some work that showed that the legalization of abortion in the U.S. (Roe v. Wade) was one of the main reasons that crime in the U.S. dropped in the '90's and continues at the same rates today. He stands behind it pretty hardily though and it doesn't seem like he has a moral agenda at all. Some might argue that the best writers are those who are best able to disguise their moral agenda, but considering he writes about all kinds of not-very-serious things like how sumo wrestling in Japan is probably corrupt as far as matches g,o and there's stuff in there about how real estate agents sell their houses for more than they sell their customers' houses (which, may or may not be surprising), I really don't think he has a hidden pro-life agenda.

Anyway, there's a bunch of stuff in there (the book), hence the 'freak' in Freakonomics. It's well-written. It's not dry. It's written for a lay audience. I recommend it. Read it and feel the power of social science! ;-)(less)

Like this review? yes (12 people liked it)

add a comment

05/30/07

Christy rated it:

(review of isbn 006073132X)

Read in May, 2007

recommends it for: eh

Honestly, I wasn't blown away. It was kind of mildly interesting, but explanations were superficial and examples were token.

I agree with his basic premise that economics is a social science in the most honest sense of the term (although he doesn't say that, I'm inferring that that was his point).

I think his theories would be a lot more interesting if he spent more time applying sociology, anthropology, urban studies, and gender studies to his assertions. I hate the hubr...more

Like this review? yes (12 people liked it)

2 comments

09/15/07

Aileen rated it:

I am indebted to airport bookstores. And I am thus indebted to such an extent, that I can confess to arriving early for any flight departing from an airport with a bookstore for the sole purpose of securing a few additional minutes to browse books. If it were not for the practicalities of travelling, I would probably have bought this book much sooner than I did for I had been securing extra minutes in airport bookstores just to read through another chapter long before I actually bought it.
...more I am indebted to airport bookstores. And I am thus indebted to such an extent, that I can confess to arriving early for any flight departing from an airport with a bookstore for the sole purpose of securing a few additional minutes to browse books. If it were not for the practicalities of travelling, I would probably have bought this book much sooner than I did for I had been securing extra minutes in airport bookstores just to read through another chapter long before I actually bought it.

You see, my travels are laden with a heavy debate: shall I pack my extra suitcase with books or groceries? I resolve this by alternating. For one trip to the Outside, a spare duffel bag will be dedicated to books and I will shun all opportunities to visit grocery stores just to preserve that determination. On the next visit, I will carry a spare cooler (rather than duffel bag) and splurge on leg of lamb and cheeses free of artificial coloring. The ultimate effect of this system, however, is a backlog in possessing the books I'd like to read.

Finally, however, the fates aligned. I was travelling to Iowa on what I expected to be a gloriously grocery-focused trip. But my cooler broke as I was carrying it to the truck that we would drive to our local airport. There wasn't time to fix it. I was sad, of course, as I had been anticipating all the pork I was going to return with from Iowa. But I consoled myself with all those Iowa cookbooks I could now carry, and resolved not to prolong any lamentations over the cooler. And, oh, did I find myself lugging around a heavy library - such hours did I spend in Powells (there was a 1 week layover in Oregon) and Iowa City's bookstores. The day before we left Iowa, Nate told me about how much he enjoyed this book. His description renewed my interest, and I committed myself to buying a copy before we left. But, alas, we ran out of time. We didn't make it to a bookstore. It was sadder than the last-minute loss of the cooler. So when we arrived in Chicago, and had a few minutes to wait for the connecting flight to Alaska, and our gate was right next to a book kiosk, and I was pretty sure there was just enough room in my carry-on to squeeze in one more book - it was this book that I grabbed.

I raced through it. Loving each chapter. I really can't recommend it enough. A fun read, for those who like to be entertained by books. Informative too, for those that like to read for knowledge, thought, and/or discourse. But what elevates it to favorite is that it alters perception and challenges assumptions. For what it's worth, I have no regrets that I carried this book rather than Iowa pork.....and I can think of no finer testament to a good book. Then again, most of my entertainment these days revolves around pickling turnips. So if turnips aren't your thing, feel free to take my recommendation with a grain of salt....but you should still read this book.(less)

Like this review? yes (10 people liked it)

2 comments

08/12/07

Elise rated it:

Read in September, 2007

Levitt makes the lofty claim that economics is not swayed by moral sensibilities - it's a pure numbers game of course! However, not knowing much about him beyond his affiliation with the University of Chicago and what was written in the book, I can surmise that he is conservative, or at least what today would be inappropriately labeled "moderate." Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily...or at least I don't view it that way. Does it affect his conclusions? Absolutely. Levitt assume...more Levitt makes the lofty claim that economics is not swayed by moral sensibilities - it's a pure numbers game of course! However, not knowing much about him beyond his affiliation with the University of Chicago and what was written in the book, I can surmise that he is conservative, or at least what today would be inappropriately labeled "moderate." Is this a bad thing? Not necessarily...or at least I don't view it that way. Does it affect his conclusions? Absolutely. Levitt assumes his assertion that Roe v. Wade is responsible for the drop in crime experienced in the 1990s is the most controversial in the book, but I was not bothered by that conclusion at all. What did raise my ire a bit was his statement that "Minorities commit more crimes." Perhaps the pure numbers seem to show so, but upon closer examination and more careful thought, one might conclude that minorities are simply arrested and convicted more often. In many cases, Levitt does delve into the deeper "behind the scenes" reasons for why things happen, but in this glaring example, he delves no further than to admit that poverty might have a link to crime commission, and with more minorities in poverty more of them commit crimes. Might it also have a link to crime conviction? The white suburban kid who can afford a long and arduous defense, or whose father knows someone who can get the kid out of a jam, has a much better chance of having his case dismissed than a poor minority kid assigned a public defender (not to say that public defenders don't do good work - in fact many of them are some of the most amazing lawyers out there). Suffice to say the system is stacked against people in poverty and minorities, and Levitt fails to fully acknowledge this in his discussion of what causes and helps prevent crime. I wasn't so much angry as I was disappointed. When one of the brightest minds in our country can't see beyond his own prejudices, where is the hope for the rest of us? Levitt might be a genius, but he is woefully culturally incompetent. (less)

Like this review? yes (8 people liked it)

add a comment

01/12/08

Rob rated it:

bookshelves: 2008, economics

Read in January, 2008

recommends it for: po-mo armchair economists

An engaging read but not necessarily the scintillating, mind-blowing experience it had been hyped as.

Levitt and Dubner present their arguments well and their style makes the at-times daunting subject matter easier to approach and thus easier to digest. I don't read much non-fiction (for example) and even less stuff about economics but I found this book quick to get through and I was able to take away their message without having to labor through it.

That said, a few point...more An engaging read but not necessarily the scintillating, mind-blowing experience it had been hyped as.

Levitt and Dubner present their arguments well and their style makes the at-times daunting subject matter easier to approach and thus easier to digest. I don't read much non-fiction (for example) and even less stuff about economics but I found this book quick to get through and I was able to take away their message without having to labor through it.

That said, a few points:

(1) They make some outrageous claims. To their credit, these claims appear to be backed up by the data. Their rhetoric is frequently hyperbolic though. At times it takes some patience to get the point of a given chapter. The arc tends to go like this: outrageous claim > brief discussion of that claim > discussion of parallel claim > presentation of data > analysis of data > tie them together > see if you can tear down the argument via convention wisdom > oops, conventional wisdom falls under scrutiny of the data. That said, the style makes it easy to break chapters up into small read-it-on-the-can chunks; if you read it that way, prepare to bite your tongue on any given objection until you have finished.

(2) In light of #1: Levitt keeps mentioning that he's not much of an economist and even poorer with his math. But there's a lot of math in here. (Presented in a friendly, non-mathematical sort of way, but math nonetheless.) So... Is he just putting us on? Or (as A. would say) is it that "stats" aren't "math"?

(3) Also in light of #1: I would like to have seen more of the data. We get a lot of "xx% decrease" and "such-and-such quadrupled" but the figures themselves are obfuscated. There is an extensive appendix of notes at the end of the book which references specific articles; I'm assuming the "hard numbers" are in those articles. But my own background (i.e., bio-psych research papers) biases me to expect a more explicit presentation of those data. So that was disappointing.

(4) Levitt & Dubner allege at the beginning of the book that there is no unifying theme. That's more/less crap. The unifying theme seems to be: here are some microeconomics, mostly having to do with crime and/or corruption (see also: crime).

(5) The "Revised & Expanded Edition" was touted to me as essential because of all the additional articles and re-published blog posts etc. that are now included in this binding. I was a bit under-whelmed by these. They were certainly interesting and they do help illuminate aspects of the text but I didn't necessarily believe that they were essential. (The revisions vis-à-vis Stetson Kennedy's KKK research however: very essential.)(less)

Like this review? yes (7 people liked it)

add a comment

07/09/07

Rachel rated it:

bookshelves: non-fiction

Sure, this book was a compelling read that offered us all some great amo for cocktail party conversation. But ultimately I think most of what Leavitt claims is crap.

He dodges accoutability with the disclaimer about his book NOT being a scholarly work, but then goes on to drop statistics, theories and expert opinions. These assertions laid, he doesn't provide readers with enough information to critically examine his perspectives.

Ultimately I have a problem with the unques...more

Like this review? yes (7 people liked it)

3 comments

07/16/07

Bobscopatz added it

Read in November, 2006

recommends it for: People who know data

Yes, zero stars.

There is one segment of this book that reports use of a dataset I know very well -- the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) data. From what details they put into the book, it's fairly clear that the researchers did not research the reliability of the data elements they chose to use from FARS. In particular, their analysis rests on the ability to identify uninjured children in vehicles that were involved in fatal crashes. FARS has data elements for this, but t...more

Like this review? yes (5 people liked it)

1 comment

12/20/08

Manny rated it:

(review of isbn 071399908X)

bookshelves: science, well-i-think-its-funny

Read in January, 2006

I loved this book, though I think the title is a bit misleading. It's not really about economics. In fact, he's showing you what interesting things you can discover when you apply statistical analysis to problems where you wouldn't normally think of using it. I use statistical methods a fair amount in my own work, so I found it particularly interesting. The most startling and thought-provoking example is definitely the unexpected reduction in US urban crime that occurred towards the end of the 2...more I loved this book, though I think the title is a bit misleading. It's not really about economics. In fact, he's showing you what interesting things you can discover when you apply statistical analysis to problems where you wouldn't normally think of using it. I use statistical methods a fair amount in my own work, so I found it particularly interesting. The most startling and thought-provoking example is definitely the unexpected reduction in US urban crime that occurred towards the end of the 20th century. Crime rates had been rising for decades, and people were really worried about what would happen if the trend continued. Then, suddenly, they peaked and started to decline. Why? There were a bunch of theories, all of them superficially plausible.

Levitt crunched the numbers, to see what proportion of the variance could be ascribed to the different factors. This is a completely standard technique; it just hadn't been used here before. He came to the conclusion that the single most important factor, by far, was the ready availability of abortion that started to come in after Roe v Wade. Other things, like more resources for policing and tougher sentencing policies, probably helped, but not nearly as much. I didn't at all get the impression that he had been expecting this result from the start, and just wanted to prove his point. He processed the data, and went where the numbers led him. That's how you're supposed to do science.

The clincher, at least as far as I was concerned, was the fact that crime statistics peaked at different points in different states, the peaks correlating very well with the dates when each state started making abortion available. States that brought it in early had correspondingly early peaks in their crime rates. It's hard to see how that could happen if Levitt's explanation weren't correct.

I am surprised that there hasn't been more discussion of Levitt's findings in the political world. Maybe it's just regarded as too hot to handle. But if Levitt is right, and at the moment I would say it's up to his critics to explain why he isn't, then pro-life campaigners would seem be heading in a very unfortunate direction.
(less)

Like this review? yes (5 people liked it)

10 comments

06/30/08

Charles rated it:

(review of isbn 0061131326)

bookshelves: political

Read in July, 2008

This book has some good lessons in how to analyze data and ask the right questions. Were it not for the grievous flaws detailed below it would have merited a much higher rating.

The fourth chapter, Where Have All the Criminals Gone?, draws a link between the fall of American crime in the 1990s and the legalization abortion in 1973, saying that crime fell due to the fact that all the potential criminals have been aborted. Whether or not this is correct, and he does provide some...more

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

2 comments

10/23/07

Chanita.Shannon marked it as to-read

bookshelves: economics, non-fiction, to-read, to-read-wish-list

Economics is not widely considered to be one of the sexier sciences. The annual Nobel Prize winner in that field never receives as much publicity as his or her compatriots in peace, literature, or physics. But if such slights are based on the notion that economics is dull, or that economists are concerned only with finance itself, Steven D. Levitt will change some minds. In Freakonomics (written with Stephen J. Dubner), Levitt argues that many apparent mysteries of everyday life don't need to be...more Economics is not widely considered to be one of the sexier sciences. The annual Nobel Prize winner in that field never receives as much publicity as his or her compatriots in peace, literature, or physics. But if such slights are based on the notion that economics is dull, or that economists are concerned only with finance itself, Steven D. Levitt will change some minds. In Freakonomics (written with Stephen J. Dubner), Levitt argues that many apparent mysteries of everyday life don't need to be so mysterious: they could be illuminated and made even more fascinating by asking the right questions and drawing connections. For example, Levitt traces the drop in violent crime rates to a drop in violent criminals and, digging further, to the Roe v. Wade decision that preempted the existence of some people who would be born to poverty and hardship. Elsewhere, by analyzing data gathered from inner-city Chicago drug-dealing gangs, Levitt outlines a corporate structure much like McDonald's, where the top bosses make great money while scores of underlings make something below minimum wage. And in a section that may alarm or relieve worried parents, Levitt argues that parenting methods don't really matter much and that a backyard swimming pool is much more dangerous than a gun. These enlightening chapters are separated by effusive passages from Dubner's 2003 profile of Levitt in The New York Times Magazine, which led to the book being written. In a book filled with bold logic, such back-patting veers Freakonomics, however briefly, away from what Levitt actually has to say. Although maybe there's a good economic reason for that too, and we're just not getting it yet. --John Moe (From Amazon)
______________________________

Forget your image of an economist as a crusty professor worried about fluctuating interest rates: Levitt focuses his attention on more intimate real-world issues, like whether reading to your baby will make her a better student. Recognition by fellow economists as one of the best young minds in his field led to a profile in the New York Times, written by Dubner, and that original article serves as a broad outline for an expanded look at Levitt's search for the hidden incentives behind all sorts of behavior. There isn't really a grand theory of everything here, except perhaps the suggestion that self-styled experts have a vested interest in promoting conventional wisdom even when it's wrong. Instead, Dubner and Levitt deconstruct everything from the organizational structure of drug-dealing gangs to baby-naming patterns. While some chapters might seem frivolous, others touch on more serious issues, including a detailed look at Levitt's controversial linkage between the legalization of abortion and a reduced crime rate two decades later. Underlying all these research subjects is a belief that complex phenomena can be understood if we find the right perspective. Levitt has a knack for making that principle relevant to our daily lives, which could make this book a hit. Malcolm Gladwell blurbs that Levitt "has the most interesting mind in America," an invitation Gladwell's own substantial fan base will find hard to resist. 50-city radio campaign.
(From Publishers Weekly)(less)

Like this review? yes (4 people liked it)

add a comment

09/14/07

atthesametime rated it:

bookshelves: economics

Read in January, 2005

There are at least two ways you can read Freakanomics – as a fun and interesting little book that uses data to tell us little things about ourselves and the world. Or, you can see it as econometrics gone apeshit and finally taking over the world. I kind of view it as both.

That said, I really enjoyed reading this. I think Levitt has developed some useful tools that can tell us some interesting stuff about the way little corners of our world are organized. I also think it is a little...more

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

add a comment

06/18/07

d e v i s a r i rated it:

Frekonomics offers an interesting way to see the hidden side of everything. Divided in six chapters; where each bears a very catchy title for example: What do Schoolteachers and Sumo Wrestlers have in common? or Why do drug dealers still live with their mum? The book brings forward the true facts of modern day morality, incentives, the power of information and the conventional wisdom, by using unconventional examples from the world of sumo wrestlers, Ku Klux Klan and Bagel business.

...more

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

add a comment

12/13/08

Christina rated it:

(review of isbn 9788535227)

bookshelves: 2008-bookstack, economics, library-book, thanks-mom

Read in March, 2008

recommended to Christina by: Mom

After packing 5 books for my trip, I found myself sitting in the Philadelphia airport with nothing to read. My mom, instead of buying me Remember Me? or Change of Heart, handed me her copy of Freakonomics: A rough Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner.

Freakonomics was a great back-up book. It was witty, insightful, and really made me think. What does the Ku Klux Klan like a group of real-estate agents? Why do drug dealers still liv...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

07/09/08

Jake rated it:

(review of isbn 006073132X)

bookshelves: anthropology, psychology

The Basics:

Freakonomics isn’t really about any one thing, which makes it a bit hard to summarize. In essence, it’s economist Steven Levitt playing around with economic principles and basic statistical analysis to examine various cultural trends and phenomena. He tackles a variety of questions, from whether or not sumo wrestlers cheat (they do) to whether or not a child’s name determines his success (it doesn’t). He does this all through examining statistics and data, trying to ...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

1 comment

09/01/07

Shoshanapnw rated it:

bookshelves: 2007, sociology

+ A fun foray into seemingly dissimilar questions about society, readable
- Cumbersome transitions at times, dismisses other arguments in suspect ways

This was a good-enough non-fiction read, though I think it does illustrate the idea that a bestseller may be appealing without being rigorous. As companion pieces, read Gladwell's The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference and Blink: The Power of Thinking without Thinking; Gladwell addresses some topics in...more + A fun foray into seemingly dissimilar questions about society, readable
- Cumbersome transitions at times, dismisses other arguments in suspect ways

This was a good-enough non-fiction read, though I think it does illustrate the idea that a bestseller may be appealing without being rigorous. As companion pieces, read Gladwell's The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference and Blink: The Power of Thinking without Thinking; Gladwell addresses some topics in common with Freakonomics and though one may also question his accuracy, he is a better writer.

Accuracy is a bit hard to evaluate here, since the methodology and statistics aren't described. My impression is that there is an over-reliance on correlation and that at times it is confused with causality. In addition, the justification for calling this research "economic" rather than "sociological," for example, seems to be the conversion of what we might understand as "psychological motivation" into "economic incentive." I'm not opposed to this, but when I consider how to design some of these correlational studies from my perspective as a psychologist, I wouldn't do anything different (other than underscore more firmly in my popular reporting that correlation is not causality). I question what appears to be mystique-building on the authors' part in this regard.

Each chapter is preceded by an annoying, self-aggrandizing excerpt about Levitt from one of Dubner's articles. I found these really offputting and was glad to learn that they have been removed from the revised edition, apparently because I was not alone in finding them irksome.

Like all reports of statistics describing a large number of participants, these reports provide, at best, generalizations about how the majority of those surveyed or observed behave (or so I assume--measures of central tendency were not reported, nor was the degree of significance in most cases). As anyone who does not have 2.3 children knows, statistical samples tell us about a fictional person. I remind you of the joke about the three statisticians who go deer-hunting. They spy a magnificent buck and the first statistician exclaims, "It's mine!" BANG! Her bullet goes two yards to the left of the deer. "No, it's mine!" calls the second. BANG! Her bullet goes two yard to the right, and the third statistician yells, "Bullseye!" This book would be more interesting, and more useful, if it told us something about the range and tails of the distribution in each study, giving the reader a better understanding of human experience, or, as our unique and individual experiences are known to statisticians, "error."(less)

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

08/07/07

Sean Cooney rated it:

Read in January, 2006

I read Freakonomics last year, but I've continued to enjoy it more and more as I share parts of it with my English classes. It's a great nonfiction work to bring into the classroom, and the way it's divided into independent chapters makes it easy to do so. Kids who in general do not read find this writer's hypotheses (and proofs thereof) fascinating. Kids in general classes have asked me to borrow it.

The way the Steven Levitt is a "rogue economist" is ironic. Although I'm s...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

add a comment

12/28/07

Joe S rated it:

bookshelves: nonfiction

Read in December, 2007

recommends it for: people who enjoy Resistance while also enjoying their privileged position that allows them to Resist

The most interesting part of this book was the introduction. Sad, but true.

Four stars for presentation. The prose is nearly invisible, which I suppose in this genre is preferable to the alternative. And the content is mildly interesting, in a "Huh. Wouldja look at that" sort of way, as though you saw a duck waddling through your back yard with jam on its head.

But insofar as it's meant to be the vehicle for a larger framework for viewing the world, this book is o...more

Like this review? yes (3 people liked it)

1 comment

05/08/08

Lesandre rated it:

Read in January, 2008

recommends it for: everybody

Exceeds the hype! Easy breezy to read, a wealth of information that I would never have stopped to contemplate. I had just read the chapter on the KKK and the real estate agent when my car was totaled; it helped me choose a posture with the insurance adjusters that wouldn't result in a total ass-raping. The last chapter about names was simultaneously horrifying and hilarious. It is dismaying to confess, now, that I am more judgmental of people's names knowing the societal/economic trends behind t...more

Like this review? yes (2 people liked it)

1 comment