In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Andy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Why do statistics textbooks discuss "mode" as a measure of centrality?
>I've never seen it used in statistical analyses, and there are obvious
>difficulties in defining it (mainly deciding how large to make the
>histogram's bins).  So why do they insist on teaching it?

Ancient history.  For a symmetric unimodal distribution,
it is the same, but it is generally difficult to estimate.

In fact, I even object to calling these "measures of 
central tendency".  They are parameters of the distribution,
and should be thought of that way.

-- 
This address is for information only.  I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]         Phone: (765)494-6054   FAX: (765)494-0558
.
.
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the
problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at:
.                  http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/                    .
=================================================================

Reply via email to