At first, I thought the analysis looked sloppy based on just the plot but I decided to dig in and realized the methodology was much better than I thought and it actually addressed my major concerns BUT the narratives on Twitter don't seem to reflect what's in the actual report.
In other words, the report itself admits that they probably didn't do a good job controlling for all the possible causal factors because there are so many and it's so complex.
So bottom line: We shouldn't be saying that family structure or race CAUSE these outcomes because SCIENTIFICALLY and STATISTICALLY the analysis doesn't support that.
2. INCOME. The second thing which I was wondering about is this: two parents can have two incomes and one parent might only have one income. So this could be an issue right? What do they say about that?
In my opinion, when you have a situation like this where you can't really tell if it's income or the two parents, the FAIR thing to do is to repeat the analysis looking at things based on income levels and see if that gives a more convincing story.
Assuming causality (which is a HUGE assumption), the idea would be that having two parents in the home MIGHT double the chances of graduating regardless of race.
The logistic regression is much less sexy than the plot but it's probably the more accurate story. Bottom line: the analysis doesn't support the conclusion that race is a factor.
So basically, as far as I can tell, they did a pretty statistically defensible analysis but for some reason the framing on Twitter is misleading and introduces a racially-tinged, causal interpretation that's not supported by the data analysis.
Here's the report if you want to check it out for yourself: ifstudies.org
Loading suggestions...