Here's my concern (because, yeah, I started with margin of error and then decided I was on the wrong track). Can I call "the folks who actually answered" (in other words, the 56%) my sample size? Or is my sample size the entire population, all of whom were contacted?
Xander ,'Get It Done'
Natter 39 and Holding
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
There is an unopened can of chicken noodle soup in the work freezer. It baffles me to the point of obsessive speculation.
Do they know canned soup isn't perishable? Are they trying to see how long it takes to freeze? Is it some kind of bet? Does it taste better frozen? Did somebody forget their coffee this morning? What's the frequency, Kenneth?
Maybe they were hoping it would explode, like frozen cans of soda sometimes do. Not sure why they'd want someone to have to clean frozen chicken noodle soup out of the freezer, though.
Emergency ice pack?
Oh! OH!! Non-explosive projectile.
More damage that way.
Can I call "the folks who actually answered" (in other words, the 56%) my sample size? Or is my sample size the entire population, all of whom were contacted?
I think the respondents would be your sample, but since it's not a random sample (it's self-selected) that mucks up the works. (I know I should just let someone who actually knows answer, but I feel the need to check if I actually retained anything at all.)
Or is my sample size the entire population, all of whom were contacted?
Yes, the number of people who answered the question.
Someone who is either pregnant or having a hard time with PMS, stuck the soup in the freezer, when she actually meant to stick it in a cabinet.
Or, you're on Candid Camera.
I see that this is getting confusing. Your sample is the 56% who answered one way and the 44% who answered the other way. It doesn't include people who were contacted but did not answer the question.
Are there any rugby fans around?
What's a "hooker" in rugby terms? I ran across this headline at the Guardian and blinked a couple of times.
Former England hooker Phil Greening has retired after failing to recover from a foot injury.
I'm pretty sure it meant something other than my first couple of thoughts.