Here is how I resolve that problem: Define the population from the sample,
rather than vice versa -- that is, my results can be generalized to any
population for which my sample could be reasonably considered to be a random
sample. Maybe we could call this "transcendental sampling" ;-) -- it is
somewhat like transcendental realism, defining reality from our percetion of
it, eh?
----- Original Message -----
From: "dennis roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Elliot Cramer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: Most Common Mistake In Statistical Inference
>
>
> here is my entry for the most common mistake made in statistical inference
...
>
> using and interpreting inference procedures under the assumption of SRS
> .... simple random samples ... when they just can't be
>
> this permeates across almost every technique ... and invades almost every
> study ever published ...
>
> if not in an internal validity sense ... surely in an external validity
sense
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
