'Objects In Space'
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.
Is there a particular advantage to looking at the median, rather than the mean, in a table like the one linked above?
The distribution isn't bell-curve shaped. There will be quite a few people getting married in their twenties, and it will tail off as people get older. While there may be only a few people getting married in their 90s, it will make the average much higher than the median, and misrepresent the data.
My guess (ex-cloaca) is that in 1890 people waited to get married until they could afford to set up their own households, i.e. in rural areas. It took a while to amass the cash to do that.
What I found interesting (and comforting I guess) in the marriage stats was the huge jump in the "Never Marrieds" found here: Percent Never Married 1970-2004
Is there a particular advantage to looking at the median, rather than the mean, in a table like the one linked above?
I think it guards against outliers, so someone marrying for the first time at 50 doesn't throw it off as much as it would in a mean. If you have 15, 20, 20, 20, 25, 25, 50, the median is 20, but the mean is 25.
Okay, that makes sense. Well then, I want all these tables in median, mean, and mode.
I also want a cookie for remembering 'mode'.
I want a pony.
The mode in my post is 20.
Anyway, married couples aren't even the majority amoung households anymore. [link]
The mode in my post is 20.
Yep. I just want to see the actual marriage data presented all three ways. And the aforementioned cookie. Or two.
ION, bon bon, I've spent far too much time enjoying the tea partay video.
I just wanted to show off how I know what the mode is and everything.
Say, anyone want to do my work for me?