"The sample mean is the average of your actual sample
values. It isn't "obviously" 78 or anything else, though
it might be close to 78. And how did you calculate the standard
error?"
I stand corrected on this point. Thanks.
"Randy Poe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "@Home" wrote:
> >
> > I am trying to solve a ? which basically gives the following facts:
> >
> > population of unknown number
> > popu std dev of 27
> > pop mean of 78
>
> With what underlying distribution?
>
> > sample of size n=81
> > 2000 random samples
> >
> > The ? is:
> >
> > what is the sample mean?
> > what is the std error (std dev of sample means)
> > what shape would the histogram be?
>
> How can you possibly know this without having the actual
> sample? It's a random variable, it depends on your
> sample.
>
> >
> > The sample mean is obviously 78 and I calculate the std error of the
sample
> > means to be 3.
>
> The sample mean is the average of your actual sample
> values. It isn't "obviously" 78 or anything else, though
> it might be close to 78. And how did you calculate the standard
> error?
>
> >
> > However I can't put the whole picture together. I suspect the distrib
would
> > be normal given the 81 samples, but is 3 a low number for a std error.
>
> Now I'm really lost. From the fact that there are 81 samples,
> you conclude the distribution is normal? And all you
> know about the samples is that there are 81 of them?
>
>
> >
> > Is it possible to translate it into a z score without any addtional
data.
>
> It isn't possible to say anything at all without additional data.
>
> - Randy
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
