If you have access to data on an entire population, say the size of every house in Ames, Iowa, it’s straight forward to answer questions like, “How big is the typical house in Ames?” and “How much variation is there in sizes of houses?”. If you have access to only a sample of the population, as is often the case, the task becomes more complicated. What is your best guess for the typical size if you only know the sizes of several dozen houses? This sort of situation requires that you use your sample to make inference on what your population looks like.
In the previous lab, ``Sampling Distributions’’, we looked at the population data of houses from Ames, Iowa. Let’s start by loading that data set.
load("more/ames.RData")
In this lab we’ll start with a simple random sample of size 60 from the population. Specifically, this is a simple random sample of size 60. Note that the data set has information on many housing variables, but for the first portion of the lab we’ll focus on the size of the house, represented by the variable Gr.Liv.Area
.
population <- ames$Gr.Liv.Area
samp <- sample(population, 60)
hist(samp)
summary(samp)
## Min. 1st Qu. Median Mean 3rd Qu. Max.
## 816 1187 1496 1585 1907 3608
mean(samp)
## [1] 1584.917
mean(population)
## [1] 1499.69
The distribution of the sample shows right skewness. The average house is about 1584.9166667 sqf. The typical size would fall in the IQR as the range is 616.75. The typical size within the sample is the sample mean 1584.9166667; This value represents the average home size in Ames.
No. I wouldn’t expect to see identical distribution. Perhaps to an extent, I could expect some similarity as each sample is drawn from the population.
One of the most common ways to describe the typical or central value of a distribution is to use the mean. In this case we can calculate the mean of the sample using,
sample_mean <- mean(samp)
Return for a moment to the question that first motivated this lab: based on this sample, what can we infer about the population? Based only on this single sample, the best estimate of the average living area of houses sold in Ames would be the sample mean, usually denoted as \(\bar{x}\) (here we’re calling it sample_mean
). That serves as a good point estimate but it would be useful to also communicate how uncertain we are of that estimate. This can be captured by using a confidence interval.
We can calculate a 95% confidence interval for a sample mean by adding and subtracting 1.96 standard errors to the point estimate (See Section 4.2.3 if you are unfamiliar with this formula).
se <- sd(samp) / sqrt(60)
lower <- sample_mean - 1.96 * se
upper <- sample_mean + 1.96 * se
c(lower, upper)
## [1] 1439.549 1730.284
This is an important inference that we’ve just made: even though we don’t know what the full population looks like, we’re 95% confident that the true average size of houses in Ames lies between the values lower and upper. There are a few conditions that must be met for this interval to be valid.
The sample must consist of at least 30 independent observations. The data should not present strong skewness.
95% confidence means that the confidence interval level for the normal model with standard error. The confidence interval for the population parameter is point estimate +- z SE, where z corresponds to the confidence level selected.
Confidence level does not interprete the confidence interval as capturing the population parameter with a certain probability, rather, 95% confidence that the population proportion is in the range.
In this case we have the luxury of knowing the true population mean since we have data on the entire population. This value can be calculated using the following command:
mean(population)
## [1] 1499.69
c(lower,upper)
## [1] 1439.549 1730.284
Yes, the confidence interval capture the true average size of houses in Ames. As you can see above, the mean of population falls in the 95% confidence interval. It is very likely that other colleagues would capture the mean of value in their lab.
I would expect around 95% of the confidence intervals to capture the true population of the mean.
Using R, we’re going to recreate many samples to learn more about how sample means and confidence intervals vary from one sample to another. Loops come in handy here (If you are unfamiliar with loops, review the Sampling Distribution Lab).
Here is the rough outline:
But before we do all of this, we need to first create empty vectors where we can save the means and standard deviations that will be calculated from each sample. And while we’re at it, let’s also store the desired sample size as n
.
samp_mean <- rep(NA, 50)
samp_sd <- rep(NA, 50)
n <- 60
Now we’re ready for the loop where we calculate the means and standard deviations of 50 random samples.
for(i in 1:50){
samp <- sample(population, n) # obtain a sample of size n = 60 from the population
samp_mean[i] <- mean(samp) # save sample mean in ith element of samp_mean
samp_sd[i] <- sd(samp) # save sample sd in ith element of samp_sd
}
Lastly, we construct the confidence intervals.
lower_vector <- samp_mean - 1.96 * samp_sd / sqrt(n)
upper_vector <- samp_mean + 1.96 * samp_sd / sqrt(n)
Lower bounds of these 50 confidence intervals are stored in lower_vector
, and the upper bounds are in upper_vector
. Let’s view the first interval.
c(lower_vector[1], upper_vector[1])
## [1] 1329.885 1544.582
plot_ci(lower_vector, upper_vector, mean(population))
df <- data.frame(lower_vector, upper_vector)
mean.population <- mean(population)
left <- sum(df$upper_vector < mean.population)
right <- sum(df$lower_vector > mean.population)
no.mean <- left + right
no.mean
## [1] 4
prop <- 1 - (no.mean/n)
prop
## [1] 0.9333333
0.9333333 contain the true populaton mean. It is close to the selected confidence interval, but not quite the same; Confidence interval is a good approximate measure and it can vary until all values are generated.
qnorm(.90)
## [1] 1.281552
90%, the critical value is 1.2815516
plot_ci
function, plot all intervals and calculate the proportion of intervals that include the true population mean. How does this percentage compare to the confidence level selected for the intervals?lower_vector <- samp_mean - qnorm(.90) * samp_sd / sqrt(n)
upper_vector <- samp_mean + qnorm(.90) * samp_sd / sqrt(n)
plot_ci(lower_vector, upper_vector, mean(population))
df <- data.frame(lower_vector, upper_vector)
mean.population <- mean(population)
left <- sum(df$upper_vector < mean.population)
right <- sum(df$lower_vector > mean.population)
no.mean <- left + right
no.mean
## [1] 11
prop <- 1 - (no.mean/n)
prop
## [1] 0.8166667
0.8166667 of the confidence intervals met the true population of mean. It does not present the exact confidence interval, but approximately near.
This is a product of OpenIntro that is released under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported. This lab was written for OpenIntro by Andrew Bray and Mine Çetinkaya-Rundel.