This topic contains a solution. Click here to go to the answer

Author Question: Suppose you observe a relationship between two categorical variables in a sample based on 22,000 ... (Read 139 times)

Mr3Hunna

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 536
Suppose you observe a relationship between two categorical variables in a sample based on 22,000 people. If this observed relationship were based on a sample of 600 people rather than 22,000, how would this affect the believability of the results (if at all)? Explain your answer.

Question 2

Whether or not we can rule out chance as an explanation for the relationship observed in a sample depends on what two things?



Related Topics

Need homework help now?

Ask unlimited questions for free

Ask a Question
Marked as best answer by a Subject Expert

Mholman93

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 328
Answer to Question 1

AN OBSERVED RELATIONSHIP IS MUCH MORE BELIEVABLE IF IT IS BASED ON A MUCH LARGER SAMPLE SIZE. SAMPLE RESULTS FROM LARGER SAMPLES ARE LESS LIKELY TO VARY FROM SAMPLE TO SAMPLE AND ARE MORE LIKELY TO REPRESENT THE TRUTH ABOUT THE POPULATION.

Answer to Question 2

1) THE STRENGTH OF THE RELATIONSHIP OBSERVED IN THE SAMPLE; AND 2) HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE INVOLVED IN THE STUDY.




Mr3Hunna

  • Member
  • Posts: 536
Reply 2 on: Jul 24, 2018
Gracias!


Zebsrer

  • Member
  • Posts: 284
Reply 3 on: Yesterday
Thanks for the timely response, appreciate it

 

Did you know?

The National Institutes of Health have supported research into acupuncture. This has shown that acupuncture significantly reduced pain associated with osteoarthritis of the knee, when used as a complement to conventional therapies.

Did you know?

Amoebae are the simplest type of protozoans, and are characterized by a feeding and dividing trophozoite stage that moves by temporary extensions called pseudopodia or false feet.

Did you know?

According to the FDA, adverse drug events harmed or killed approximately 1,200,000 people in the United States in the year 2015.

Did you know?

Although the Roman numeral for the number 4 has always been taught to have been "IV," according to historians, the ancient Romans probably used "IIII" most of the time. This is partially backed up by the fact that early grandfather clocks displayed IIII for the number 4 instead of IV. Early clockmakers apparently thought that the IIII balanced out the VIII (used for the number 8) on the clock face and that it just looked better.

Did you know?

Vaccines prevent between 2.5 and 4 million deaths every year.

For a complete list of videos, visit our video library