Originally posted by Thurisaz
The sample size is too small, it is that simple.
The slab of text that you posted did nothing to refute my calculations.
Do you understand the formulae that I used? You claim that you are qualified to understand statistical sampling techniques, yet you supplied NO
mathematics to support your claim that the sample is too small? Why?
The mathematics requires a sample size of 9600, to be 95% confident that the sample and population proportions differ by less than 0.01. I showed you
the calculations.
Sure, there may be some minor errors, from a practical point of view, if the sample was not truly random. Any bias, or partially stratified grouping
will throw a little error into the overall result - which would require a larger sample than 9600 to be as confident. However, I can take at face
value that the survey was random, as it was stated in your quote.
Perhaps, instead of quoting text, you should read, understand and apply statistical techniques that can be found in common 1st Year University
statistics text books.
Originally posted by Thurisaz
The main protection agaisnt this kind of error is to use a large enough sample.
I agree. I showed you the mathematics that determines a sample size of 9600 gives a fairly confident result. 9600 is a large sample of people. In
this case, 12500 is an even larger sample.
It's a fundamental flaw that many people possess, when they use their 'gut feelings' with regards to statistics and probability. Luckily, we've
got mathematics to save us, hey?
I know you don't believe me and you're trusting your 'gut feelings', so I advise you to show my calculations to someone who can understand them
and have them independently verified. By all means, don't believe me, let someone else tell you that I'm right.
What do I care, anyway... I'm just a troll. At least I'm 95% certain of it.