[ I have rearranged Zar's note.] After this one,
> >>> Harold W Kerster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 10/29/01 04:31PM >>>
> If you define the range as max - min, you get zero, not one. What
> definition are you using.
On 29 Oct 2001 16:11:15 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerrold Zar)
wrote:
> I was referring to the definition that others on the list had proposed:
> max - min +1. It is NOT a definition with which I agree.
If {max - min + K} had been a formal proposal, it should have
stated that K will be "1" when the numbers are reported to
the nearest integer, but -- generally -- K should sensibly
reflect the precision of measurement-and-reporting.
I don't know who needs it in the real world most of the time,
but using K gives a better -- usually safer -- estimate when
you are using the range to estimate the standard deviation.
But.
Whenever {max-min} is small enough that K is a sizable
correction, someone needs to speak carefully about the 'range.'
To put it another way: If all the cases all are observed at
the same value, and it matters, then the audience really
does deserve to hear the details.
--
Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
