Skip to main content

Reporting Mean or Median

Who would think that a simple statistic like a mean or a median would make a difference?




In large samples involving thousands of people, and when data are normally distributed (close to the shape of a bell curve), the mean and median will be nearly the same. In fact, in a theoretical distribution called the normal curve, the mean, median, and  mode are in the middle.

But, many samples are not normal distributions. Instead, the often contain extreme scores called outliers or a lot of scores bunched up at high or low levels (skewed). Sadly, even people that understand statistics, continue to report the mean as if they are not thinking about their samples.

Suppose you work for a company where the top person earns $300,000 but most folks earn $30,000 to $60,000. Well that $300,000 is gonna skew results and the mean will look much higher than the median.

I ran some fictitious data on a sample of 10 people. Nine earn between $30 and $60K and one earns $300K. The Mean = $67K (standard deviation = 82.58), but the Median is only $38.5K and the Range = $270K.

Now those results are fictitious and it is a small sample so it magnifies the differences. But you know some folks are earning over $1,000,000.00 in some companies and lots of folks aren't earning anywhere near that amount.



So who cares? Well salaries make a lot of difference if you are arguing for a raise, considering a change of jobs, voting on budgets in not-for-profit organizations, and more. How motivating is it to give a donation to a company that helps the poor where the CEO pulls down nearly a million bucks a year and you get by on $65K-- or less?

But there's more. Teacher evaluations are usually skewed -- most students give high ratings-- so the median and range are more appropriate than the mean.




[ Read more about statistics in
Creating Surveys on AMAZON]





Real estate prices can be out-of-whack if you look at the mean price in a city where a few multimillion dollar homes pull the mean to a high level compared to the median price.

I see research papers where the scientists report the average age of people in surveys is 19 and they tell you thir sample was from a university. No problem with age 19 but when they report a Mean of 19 and a standard deviation of 5, there is a problem! If you understand standard deviations, you will know why they probably did not have a lot of 14-year olds in their university!

You can see that knowledgeable folks can play games with a simple statistic.

If you forgot about the meaning of some terms, here's a link to a free glossary.


A simple example




















Counselors, teachers, and parents - think about test scores and how they are reported.  Test scores for students at school may be distorted by a few very high scoring or very low scoring students.

"Averages" can be deceiving.




Read more about basic statistics in APPLIED STATISTICS: CONCEPTS FOR COUNSELORS at

AMAZON



Connections

My Page    www.suttong.com

My Books  
 AMAZON     GOOGLE PLAY STORE

FACEBOOK  
 Geoff W. Sutton

TWITTER  @Geoff.W.Sutton

LinkedIN Geoffrey Sutton  PhD

Publications (many free downloads)
     
  Academia   Geoff W Sutton   (PhD)
     
  ResearchGate   Geoffrey W Sutton   (PhD)


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Personal Self-Concept Questionnaire (PSQ)

  The Personal Self-Concept Questionnaire  ( PSQ )   Overview The Personal Self-Concept Questionnaire (PSQ) measures self-concept based on ratings of 18 items, which are grouped into four categories: Self-fulfilment, autonomy, honesty, and emotional self-concept. Subscales : The PSQ has four subscales 1. Self-fulfilment (6 items) 2. Autonomy (4 items) 3. Honesty (3 items) 4. Emotional self-concept (5 items)  👉 [ Read more about Self-Concept and Self-Identity] The PSQ is a Likert-type scale with five response options ranging from totally disagree to totally agree. Reliability and Validity In the first study, coefficient alpha = .85 and in study two, alpha = .83. Data analysis supported a four-dimensional model (see the four categories above). Positive correlations with other self-concept measures were statistically significant. Other notes The authors estimated it took about 10 minutes to complete the PSQ. Their first study included people ages 12 to 36 ( n = 506). In the second s

Student Self-Efficacy

  Assessment name:  STUDENT SELF-EFFICACY SCALE * Note. This post has been updated to provide an available measure of student self-efficacy. ———- Scale overview:  The  student self-efficacy scale i s a 10-item measure of self-efficacy. It was developed using data from university nursing students in the United States. Authors: Melodie Rowbotham and Gerdamarie Schmitz Response Type:  A four-choice rating scale as follows: 1 = not at all true 2 = hardly true 3 = moderately true 4 = exactly true   Self-efficacy is the perception that a person can act in a way to achieve a desired goal.  Scale items There are 10 items. Examples: I am confident in my ability to learn, even if I am having a bad day. If I try hard enough, I can obtain the academic goals I desire.   Psychometric properties The authors reported that their sample scores ranged from 25 to 40 with a scale mean of 34.23 ( SD  = 3.80. Internal consistency was high at alpha = .84. The authors reported the results of a principal compon

Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Anxiety Questionnaire (MSEAQ)

  Scale name: Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Anxiety Questionnaire (MSEAQ) Scale overview: The Mathematics Self-Efficacy and Anxiety Questionnaire (MSEAQ) is a 29-item self-report measure of both mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics anxiety. Author: Diana Kathleen May Response Type: Items are rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale following a “no response” option: 1 = Never 2 = Seldom 3 = Sometimes 4 = Often 5 = usually Sample items 1. I feel confident enough to ask questions  in my mathematics class. 6. I worry that I will not be able to get a  good grade in my mathematics course.   Subscales and basic statistics for the MSEAQ       Self-Efficacy M = 44.11, SD = 10.78, alpha = .93       Anxiety M = 46.47, SD = 12.61, alpha = .93       Total Scale M = 90.58, SD = 22.78, alpha = .96 Reliability: See the Cronbach’s alpha levels reported above. Validity: There were significant positive correlations with similar measures. The results of a Fa