One MR reader writes in the comments:
I’m very interested to hear what you come up with for your paper. I hope that I can’t guess what it says already.
I was a bit taken aback by this. I’ve written about (guessing) 3500 blog posts over the last three years, on a wide variety of economic issues, plus earlier posts at Volokh.com. Plus many books and articles.
Wouldn’t it be odd if she couldn’t predict my views on most issues?
I understand procedural bias, which happens when a person throws out valuable information because he doesn’t like the conclusion. And I understand ideological rigidity, which suggests that a person’s view on one issue predicts his view on most other issues far too readily. I also understand that a curious and open-minded person should be absorbing enough information to change (how much?) percent of his views every (how many?) years or so. (Is it worse if I am changing my views in predictable fashion, or should the change be a random walk?) But is it so bad for the prolific to be predictable? Am I not allowed to have a shelf life?
Here are my cards: Given previous investigations, I expect the United States to be a leader in global medical innovation.
On related topics, here is Jane Galt on bias.