The Right to Rule by Thumb: A Comment on Epistemology in "A Route Map for Successful Applications of Geographically-Weighted Regression"

Levi John Wolf
Additional contact information
Levi John Wolf: University of Bristol

No qzjwb, SocArXiv from Center for Open Science

Abstract: Comber et al. (2022) provides an important contribution to the future of quantitative geography and geographic analysis. The contribution is chiefly in their development of a "GWR Route Map," a diagram showing the sequence of analytical steps that "successful" specification searches in local modelling tend to follow. Geographically-weighted techniques have been rapidly expanding, both in terms of complexity, users, and disciplinary reach. With geographically-weighted methods now in so many more analysts' hands, any new rule of thumb will have a major imprint. But, by what right does the thumb rule the analysts? That is, what "counts" as valid knowledge about local models in general? In the following comment, I argue that we probably should use theory, not route maps to decide specifications. But, if we're pressed to build route maps, we sorely need better epistemological foundations for them. I discuss a few previous examples of strongly-grounded route maps and offer a few paths to these better grounds as well as two ways to the exit.

Date: 2022-05-19
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-geo and nep-ure
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/628630556a659e48a0eec5de/

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:socarx:qzjwb

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/qzjwb

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in SocArXiv from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().