On 4 Dec 2003 07:41:29 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (VOLTOLINI) wrote: > My doubt is....... > > When using numbered pieces of papers to randomize samples. Is this as correct as > using a random table? > > Or..... in a scientific guided randomization are these two methods the same?
You *hope* that your use of numbered pieces of paper is random; and that you can write it up with enough detail to satisfy a reviewer at a journal -- usually, they are careless and heedless, so that the write-up is not apt to be an actual problem. The advantage of using a "random table" (or a computer generated list) is that you record the information and the process can be reproduced by anyone. For the table, that would include the book, the page number, etc., and how you selected <whatever>. For the computer, that would be sufficient detail about the computer, the program, the algorithm and the seed-value. You write that all down, just in case anyone asks. -- Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html "Taxes are the price we pay for civilization." . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
