I tried to figure out why the average age dropped so much from 1800 to 1900.
I created a test file with a male with lifespan 1960-1990 and a female
1960-2010. Their
average life should be 40 years.
Legacy 8 calculated the average to 39 years, 11m, 20d. OK.
Then I added a female born 1990, still
Eliz,
What we are all wondering is what records are selected to be used for the
averaging?
For the 1900-1999 grouping does that mean a person had to be born aft 1900
or died after 1900?
How much does abt., aft., bet, bef, cal, cir, records are used if any?
A simple explanation on the Help page
David,
I note that there has not been a single response to your
question from the Legacy staff. I would have thought it a
simple thing for them to have supplied the answer to your
question, yet they have not done so. Additionally I believe
there should be an appendix to the Legacy manual that
pr
I think I have a possible explanation. I have been working with a recent
family file where I still have lots of missing data. On a quick estimate
only about 20% of my individuals have both birth and death data and the
numbers for century-lifespans are about 20% of the gender-lifespans
which suggest
Some good points here. As it happens I have no individuals of
indeterminate sex but I do have a significant number with missing birth
or death dates which makes the population available for the lifespan
statistics small. However, I still cannot see any reason why there
should be such a big discrepa
Can't tell you specifically, but it sounds like you have a relatively high
proportion of infant deaths with no sex specified. So you get a bunch of zeros
included in the overall average that are not included in the male/female
averages.
I don't think an individual is included in the averages a
David -
Thank you for opening my eyes to the box on the right - "Edit Individual"
:-)
You are correct that they do appear to be based upon birth year. I have
another (different line) that lived 3 months and 1 day longer than Aunt
Annie; he was born 1855 and died in 1961; thus she was not the "old
It is possible to check who the individual in question is by selecting
Edit individual. I started checking back and found that your suggestion
could be correct until I checked my longest living between 1700 and 1799
and came up with an individual born in 1787 and dying in 1878. On this
basis your A
The "Longest Living Individual" had me puzzled. I regularly saw my Aunt
Annie until she died at 105 - always had to read the current issue of Time
magazine because she would quiz you on it, especially if you disagreed with
her view! :-) She died in 1979. The statistic "Individual who lived the
long
That may well be true. I have a tendency with pre-1837 records to only
put in a christening date and not estimate a birth date. However, having
said that I would expect that to affect both the by-century averages and
the by-gender averages and it is the major discrepancy between these
numbers that
I wondered if you have a lot of people with no known birth date but who do
have a date of death. Legacy thinks that = 0 which will lower your age
stats a lot.
Eliz
Not Today and Not without a Fight
(Anon)
For all that has been, thanks.
For all that will be, yes.
(Dag Hammarskjold)
On Mon, D
David Newton wrote:
> Could one of you explain to me how the statistics are calculated?
>
> In my family file the average lifespan by century never exceeds 17 years
> whereas the average male and female lifespans are around 53 and 48
> respectively. These figures seem to be inconsistent with each o
I can't figure this out. Same issue with marriages by century.
Graham
-Original Message-
From: David Newton [mailto:davidnew...@drdavid.plus.com]
Sent: 16 December 2013 12:05
To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: [LegacyUG] Lifespan, and other, statistics
Could one of you explain t
13 matches
Mail list logo
