Talk:Effective sample size

It would be helpful to put some reference to accompany "The case where the correlations are not uniform is somewhat more complicated". T 15:15, 15 September 201

It would be helpful to put some reference to accompany "The case where the correlations are not uniform is somewhat more complicated". T 15:15, 15 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taurvil (talk • contribs)

A reference to the first Neff calculation should be made as I cannot find it anywhere else I the literature and in fact I have found different formulations giving different answers for the same values. The more standard Nee=N(1-r)/(1+r) where r = lag 1 correlation. 97.104.197.234 (talk) 17:15, 23 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Should this article be merged with design effect?

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Given that ESS is basically the inverse of design effect, I'm wondering if it makes more sense to merge it into design effect (specifically: make it a section there, and redirect this article to that section). What do others here think? Tal Galili (talk) 16:45, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

(cc users who've edited this page in the last 50 edits and may want to weigh in: User:Beland, User:GünniX, User:Michael Hardy, User:Shellwood, User:Qwfp - you're all great wiki editors, sorry if the ping is too blunt. Just don't want to have this discussion drag for a year :) ) Tal Galili (talk) 20:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
At a quick glance, it's unclear to me how they are related; both articles are too math-heavy to really be accessible to most readers. Some sort of visual explanation or non-equation example would help a lot. -- Beland (talk) 00:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Effective sample size = (1/(design effect)) - they have a simple linear relationship between the two. The fact that they are both difficult articles for someone not in the field, I agree (and I agree they should be improved). Tal Galili (talk) 07:24, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
Redirected, as the summary is a concise summary which is sufficiently encyclopaedic, and the additional detail here is either unnecessary or overlaps with derivations elsewhere on the page. So, there was nothing to merge. Klbrain (talk) 10:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.