Timeline for Standard error of mean - two methods don't give the same answer
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 13, 2017 at 21:18 | comment | added | whuber♦ | I don't know about invalid, but evidently it results in some combination of two components of variance: the within-group variance and the between-group variance. That makes it difficult to interpret or assign any meaning to. | |
| Jun 13, 2017 at 21:14 | comment | added | hooyeh | @whuber Thanks for pointing that out. So I think it boils down if all the persons data come from the same population or each comes from a separate population. If the latter is true, then the underlying assumption behind my standard error calculation is invalid. Correct? | |
| Jun 9, 2017 at 22:02 | comment | added | David Smith | No, you shouldn't. Except in very special circumstances. | |
| Jun 9, 2017 at 21:52 | comment | added | whuber♦ | You seem to be on the threshold of rediscovering Analysis of Variance :-). For some intuition, consider what would happen if the data for Person #5 were 103, 102. Could you interpret the two versions of the SE in that case? | |
| Jun 9, 2017 at 20:51 | history | asked | hooyeh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |