

Subject:
Question regardind a statistical matter
Category: Science > Instruments and Methods Asked by: romkoga List Price: $12.00 
Posted:
09 Jul 2006 06:20 PDT
Expires: 08 Aug 2006 06:20 PDT Question ID: 744636 

There is no answer at this time. 

Subject:
Re: Question regardind a statistical matter
From: frdega on 09 Jul 2006 09:25 PDT 
This smells of homework to me Essentially it is saying that you have a population of 100 and you only listen to the views of the first 50 that turn up. Using Reducto Ad Absurdum, the views of the first to turn up are taken as the 'sample'. 
Subject:
Re: Question regardind a statistical matter
From: romkoga on 09 Jul 2006 10:05 PDT 
Nope. This is the real story from my actual life. I assure you this is no fiction. Ro. 
Subject:
Re: Question regardind a statistical matter
From: myoaringa on 10 Jul 2006 03:26 PDT 
Okay, then a couple of questions. What did the advisor mean by "fire" the nonparticipants? Just ignore them, assume that the survey was complete with 50 participants? Do you then mean by "join us" that those persons will perhaps soon submit their questionaires? I know extremely little about statistics, but I think that nonresponse is also a category that will be important for calculating the range of accuracy of the results you do have. 
Subject:
Re: Question regardind a statistical matter
From: myoaringa on 11 Jul 2006 06:29 PDT 
Thanks for the clarification. Obviously, I misunderstood the situation. As I now understand it, the students fill in the questionaires about different websites, only five of the questions being subjective and answered on 1 to 5 scale. Apparently  my assumption  each website is only appraised by one student, so the number of students participating in the work is not of statistical importance for the results of the questionaires. This assumption presumes a measure of objectivity on the part of the students. If this is a correct understanding of the situation, I would agree with the advisor: it is better to let the active 9 students complete the work, rather than waiting and hoping that the other 9 join in. If the latter were offered money to participate, and missed the work session, they don't deserve a second chance. The nine more consciencious students should be allowed to complete the project. I may have been reading incorrectly between the lines, but if I haven't, it seems to me that the question is not so much about a "statistical matter" but rather about a justificaton for the best way to complete the project. 
Subject:
Re: Question regardind a statistical matter
From: romkoga on 11 Jul 2006 08:27 PDT 
Dear myoarin, The question is not about handling our staff on the project. The real question is of Statistical importance: Can we use more people, in order to complete the research faster, or not. R. 
Subject:
Re: Question regardind a statistical matter
From: romkoga on 13 Jul 2006 12:07 PDT 
Wow  I'm so disappointed. No answer for this question?? I was sure that this one was easy but I see It is not. Maybe my expectations were too high... R. 
Subject:
Re: Question regardind a statistical matter
From: myoaringa on 13 Jul 2006 14:53 PDT 
Romko, I still have a problem understanding your question. To most of us it would seem evident that by using more people the project can be completed faster. 9 students can complete 450 in x time (call it 1 day); 18 could complete 900 in x time, but 9 didn't show up. If they turned up the second day and were as diligent as the first nine, then 1350 forms could be completed in two days, certainly better than "firing" them and foregoing their efforts. BUT, the advisor raise the question of accuracy, a logical but unfathomable factor from this side. I expect that this relates to the students' rating of those five questions and a fear that maybe less conscience students  or ones trying to make of for lost time  would rate haphazardly, diminishing the quality of the whole project. But this is just speculation on my part as I try to understand the question. 
Subject:
Re: Question regardind a statistical matter
From: romkoga on 14 Jul 2006 23:47 PDT 
hello myoarin, First of all  thanks. Please note that I'm not trying to find the "common sense" answer, but trying to get a scientificstatistical one. the science of statistics is AFAIK a mathematical field with it's own rules and standards. I would like to get a professional answer on my question. Thanks, R. 
Subject:
Re: Question regardind a statistical matter
From: dmrmvga on 20 Jul 2006 13:50 PDT 
I suggest your adviser is not so worried about the statistical "accuracy" of the research; that is really a function of the experimental design. However, it does seem clear that you have two pools of observers: one committed and one less so and you do have subjective questions so the observers influence the observations for those questions at least. Since the assumption of most statistics is that all observations are from a common pool, and you know you have two different pools (based on this criterion) of observers that can influence the observations, your statistical adviser is advising you that the basic assumption is incorrect in this case. Since there are probably many other factors dividing the observers into different pools (how many males vs. females, different ethnic groups, etc.) the adviser may be erring on the side of caution. Reducing the size of a randomly chosen pool of observers post selection probably also has statistical risks; but that is why you have a statistical adviser, no? 
Subject:
Re: Question regardind a statistical matter
From: romkoga on 21 Jul 2006 00:59 PDT 
Thanks dmrmv. I still think that there is no harm in using the extra force. R. 
If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answerssupport@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you. 
Search Google Answers for 
Google Home  Answers FAQ  Terms of Service  Privacy Policy 