Take the 2-minute tour ×
Cross Validated is a question and answer site for people interested in statistics, machine learning, data analysis, data mining, and data visualization. It's 100% free, no registration required.

My team manages a survey that has been reporting for many years as "relative sample error" a range of figures which are in fact the Xs in "+/- X percent" of an estimate where X is chosen to make up a 95 percent confidence interval. So in fact they are about 1.96 times the relative standard error. The users - who are not statisticians - appreciate these numbers because they can easily turn them into a confidence interval (which would take them one more step than they wanted if we quoted actual standard errors).

My question is, what is the correct way to describe these figures?

  • "Relative standard error" is certainly wrong;
  • "1.96 * RSE" is clumsy and not quite correct (because they might be created with a bootstrap method which does not calculate the confidence interval that way)
  • "Relative half confidence interval" is probably correct but not very plain English
  • "95 percent confidence interval, expressed as plus or minus percentage of the estimate" is correct but verbose

Putting aside any questions about how these are calculated, any views on good terminology?

share|improve this question
I've never heard a specific term for exactly that thing, but my closest guesses would be "relative margin of error" or "margin of error of X percent". –  G. Jay Kerns Jan 16 '12 at 2:40
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 4 down vote accepted

"Margin of Error" is fairly common and relatable term. Margin of error is commonly expressed as the radius of the confidence interval, Wikipedia entry. You could include a footnote or reference to details on your 95% confidence intervals.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.