2 ms·

I can't really trust this analysis if they think less than one quarter of the Princeton graduates end up in the top 1%. All right, kidding aside (although the

I can't really trust this analysis if they think less than one quarter of the Princeton graduates end up in the top 1%. All right, kidding aside (although the above observation is serious), statistics about the earnings of the graduates are very unreliable. I never disclosed to my Alma Mater how much I earn, and I guess most people don't disclose that either. How then do they figure out how many of the graduates are in the top 1%?

harryh 10y ago
statistical sampling
- credit_guy 10y ago
  Statistical sampling works if the sampled people answer your question. It also helps if you can find the contact of the samples to begin with. Now, here's some ways the statistical sampling can be substantially biased: people who are still repaying their student loans are in Princeton's database, and they can be contacted; those who didn't take loans (the rich kids) are not, so negative bias. Opposite: Princeton alumni with kids, who hope to get their kids into Princeton, donate. So they are in a database, and they end up in the statistical sampling. This is positive bias. Back to negative bias: some Princeton graduates end up unemployed (generally not because they are unqualified, but because of burnout/depression/family problems). Do you think they are in the mood to answer the phone and disclose their (non-existant) current income? In principle you can correct for a known bias. You can correct for several, but the more adjustments, the more noise in the estimation. Now back to my original remark: do you honestly believe only 23% of the Princeton graduates are in the top 1% of the earners?
  - erubin 10y ago
    does the survey check a few classes or a large sample? Between folks still in graduate school, in their early careers, people who have left the workforce to have kids or pursue lower paying jobs because they have financial security, you might end up with a smaller group than you expect putting in all the hours to make top 1% income.

harryh 10y ago

statistical sampling

credit_guy 10y ago
Statistical sampling works if the sampled people answer your question. It also helps if you can find the contact of the samples to begin with. Now, here's some ways the statistical sampling can be substantially biased: people who are still repaying their student loans are in Princeton's database, and they can be contacted; those who didn't take loans (the rich kids) are not, so negative bias. Opposite: Princeton alumni with kids, who hope to get their kids into Princeton, donate. So they are in a database, and they end up in the statistical sampling. This is positive bias. Back to negative bias: some Princeton graduates end up unemployed (generally not because they are unqualified, but because of burnout/depression/family problems). Do you think they are in the mood to answer the phone and disclose their (non-existant) current income? In principle you can correct for a known bias. You can correct for several, but the more adjustments, the more noise in the estimation. Now back to my original remark: do you honestly believe only 23% of the Princeton graduates are in the top 1% of the earners?
- erubin 10y ago
  does the survey check a few classes or a large sample? Between folks still in graduate school, in their early careers, people who have left the workforce to have kids or pursue lower paying jobs because they have financial security, you might end up with a smaller group than you expect putting in all the hours to make top 1% income.