axumblade said:
Yeah...the thing about that is that nobody is going to give the whole populous a survey unless it's conducted by someone who has a lot of time/money on these tests. I don't think I understand what you're saying because you're pushing a personal belief on a sample survey. I suppose it could work as flipping a coin would though based on the fact that Obama and McCain were the only ones really left in the competition at the end, but I highly doubt that's what you're even trying to say. |
Actually thats exactly the point I was trying to show. If there are 2 equally athletic people about to engage in a footrace, and you ask 700 people who is going to win, the survey will turn out to be right approximately 50% of the time. Its hardly mind blowing stuff, and shouldn't be used to vindicate small data sets of being generally poor at representing whole populations.
My "personal belief" that small data sets are often poor representations of much larger populations is widely held by most statisticians as well. There are things you can do to mitigate the problems inherent in small data sets, but you should always check your results with known quantitifiable data to avoid looking foolish.
Anyhoo, my point is simply that you should take any survey, or poll's, results with a grain of salt. Particularly when we can extrapolate their results into our "known" sales data, and find it off by large margins.
If you are actually interested in statistics, perhaps a course on the subject would help your understanding.
But this discussion is now way off topic.
