3 ms·

Statistically speaking 4000 is a good enough number. I mean, election polls in the US usually use less than that for a population of 300 million and they're usu

Statistically speaking 4000 is a good enough number. I mean, election polls in the US usually use less than that for a population of 300 million and they're usually close to the real number.

maccio92 8y ago
Except in 2016. And that 4000 is a biased population of only game devs that attended a certain conference. Maybe if it was a totally random sample of 4000 of all game devs it would be statistically significant.
- learc83 8y ago
  >Except in 2016 In 2016 the national polls were very close to the final result--within a couple points. Remember that Clinton won the popular vote. State polls were less accurate, but the general consensus is they were wrong due to undecided voters breaking more for Trump than is normal in the final few days--after the final state polls were conducted. That being said, your point stands. Sample method is generally more important than sample size, and 4,000 game devs who self selected to attend a conference is very unlikely to be a representative sample.
phkahler 8y ago
>> Statistically speaking 4000 is a good enough number. It seems to me the GP comment meant that because it was a survey among people who attended GDC it's not representative. If that is why they questioned it, I'd say it's an even more relevant survey, as those are the people who care more about the industry and have more influence. No mater how you slice it, I'd say it's an indicator not to be ignored.
- prepend 8y ago
  It’s an indicator, but just unlikely to be an indicator for the population of game developers.
frobozz 8y ago
When they do these election polls, do they stand in the street randomly choosing people coming out of the conference centre where one of the major parties is having their AGM?
kolinko 8y ago
They are taking a very good care to select the right 4000 people.

3 ms·

Statistically speaking 4000 is a good enough number. I mean, election polls in the US usually use less than that for a population of 300 million and they're usu

by tridentboy 8y ago

Statistically speaking 4000 is a good enough number. I mean, election polls in the US usually use less than that for a population of 300 million and they're usually close to the real number.

maccio92 8y ago
Except in 2016. And that 4000 is a biased population of only game devs that attended a certain conference. Maybe if it was a totally random sample of 4000 of all game devs it would be statistically significant.
- learc83 8y ago
  >Except in 2016 In 2016 the national polls were very close to the final result--within a couple points. Remember that Clinton won the popular vote. State polls were less accurate, but the general consensus is they were wrong due to undecided voters breaking more for Trump than is normal in the final few days--after the final state polls were conducted. That being said, your point stands. Sample method is generally more important than sample size, and 4,000 game devs who self selected to attend a conference is very unlikely to be a representative sample.
phkahler 8y ago
>> Statistically speaking 4000 is a good enough number. It seems to me the GP comment meant that because it was a survey among people who attended GDC it's not representative. If that is why they questioned it, I'd say it's an even more relevant survey, as those are the people who care more about the industry and have more influence. No mater how you slice it, I'd say it's an indicator not to be ignored.
- prepend 8y ago
  It’s an indicator, but just unlikely to be an indicator for the population of game developers.
frobozz 8y ago
When they do these election polls, do they stand in the street randomly choosing people coming out of the conference centre where one of the major parties is having their AGM?
kolinko 8y ago
They are taking a very good care to select the right 4000 people.