Bookmark and Share

Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

st: RE: No. of observations


From   Kieran McCaul <kieran.mccaul@uwa.edu.au>
To   "statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu" <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject   st: RE: No. of observations
Date   Tue, 22 May 2012 10:31:27 +0800

...

A sub-sample of a sample will, by definition, be smaller than the sample, won't it?

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Hamizah Hassan
Sent: Tuesday, 22 May 2012 9:29 AM
To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject: st: No. of observations

Greetings,

I have an issue that has been questioned where the no. of observations of my full sample and sub-sample (of a variable) are not the same, i.e. the total observations of my sub-sample is lesser than the full sample. How could I explain this?

Thank you.

Regards,
Hamizah Hassan
RMIT University
Melbourne 

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/


© Copyright 1996–2018 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   Site index