lecture 3 Flashcards

1
Q

define class

A

one of the categories into qualitative data can be classified

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

define frequency

A

number of obs (record feature, catgorical, like colour) into a particular class/category

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

define relative frequency

A

class freq / total number of obs in data set

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

define percentage

A

Class relative freq x 100

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

describe graphical methods

A

form tables or graphs
many types of graphical displays
summarize data = display so can be understood

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

describe pie chart - general

A

classes represented by slice of pie = circle
size of each size proportional to relative freq of diff classes in data set

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

describe pie chart - aspects

A

can put counts in the slices
better to put percent - relative freq bc more informative
can separate by region if wanna see how data is

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

describe bar plot - general

A

classes represented by bars
height of each bar either class freq or class relative freq or class percentage
width of bars not important

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

describe bar plot - specific

A

do not learn much but just way to represent
can have counts or percents, can separate by region

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Describe numerical methods

A

class freq, relative freq, percentage
usually displayed in table

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

describe kidney stone treatment - general

A

designed experiment
Experimental units = patients with kidney stones
2 treatment groups = a and b
each patient assigned to one treatment group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

describe kidney stone treatment - variables

A

3 =
Treatment group= a or b
outcome = success/failure of removing stones
size of stone = large/small
ALL QUALITATIVE- no numerical scale attached

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

describe kidney stone treatment - table

A

shows # of patients treated per treatment
number = frequ of success per treatment
success rate percentage per treatment
do not differ significantly but b is a bit better, seems b is better since higher percentage of success

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

describe kidney stone treatment - table of size

A

Treatment a has higher percentage of success with both small and large sized stones
success rates diff for treatment group and for kidney stone size
allocation of sizes of stones to diff groups is uneven
but overall = docs recommend b
pooling into single table disregards effect of conditional probability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

describe kidney stone treatment - issues

A

number of patients when considering stone size are very diff
doctors tend to give treatment a to large stone and b to small stone
patients with large stones using treatment a do worse than those with small stones, even if small stones used b
but data doesnt indicate a is better overall

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

describe kidney stone treatment - interpretation

A

Relationship between treatment and success/failure changed when stone size considered
must be careful when interpreting results from study
paradox = mistaken interpretation of what number means

17
Q

what does kidney stone data illustrate

A

simpsons paradox
Relationship between treatment method and success rate confounded by stone size
*not consequence of treatment - no influence on it

18
Q

describe simpsons paradox

A

third variable changes interpretation of relationship between other variables
third relationship = confounding factor
Changed interpretation
can happen with 4th variable = more complicated

19
Q

describe simpsons paradox uc berkeley college - variables

A

sex = male/female
majors
Admission’s status = admitted/rejected
each = QUALITATIVE DATA

20
Q

describe simpsons paradox uc berkeley college - table of frequencies admitted

A

males = way higher than females
looks like bias against females
but not enough info
need number who applied = successful applicant/total applicants

21
Q

describe simpsons paradox uc berkeley college - table including % admitted

A

males = 44.5%
females = 30.4%
seems to indicate bias against females

22
Q

describe simpsons paradox uc berkeley college - table including major

A

when including % admitted per major = for males and females numbers pretty similar =
cannot make conclusion about bias against females based on the table results

23
Q

describe simpsons paradox uc berkeley college conclusions

A

major = confounding factor
no department was significantly biased against females
relationship between sex and admission status confounded by major
be careful when interpreting analysis
have to account properly to draw conclusions

24
Q

describe underreporting

A

make things appear different than they are