5 ms·
Well if all you have is 170 people then you're not sampling but testing the population. I'd go with the A/B testing option just to get more experience with it.
by fleitz 15y ago
Well if all you have is 170 people then you're not sampling but testing the population.
I'd go with the A/B testing option just to get more experience with it. Having data at a low confidence interval is better than having no data at all. Maybe it's a wash maybe it's actually very important. Worst case is there is no overwhelming winner and you're back where you started.
Use the following link to determine the sample size you need.
http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm
- gs7 15y agoThanks for the link and the correct terminology (I updated my post).
- fleitz 15y agoTo expand it really depends on what the results of the testing are: If you split your 170 customers into two groups of 85, if 40 of 85 pick A and 5 of 85 pick B then it's extremely likely that A is the better choice. If 39 pick A and 40 pick B then you'd need a larger sample size to overcome the margin of error. Of course at a 95% confidence interval any result even in excess of the MOE is pure chance 1 of out 20 times. What I'd do is split your customer base into 3 groups of 50% 25% and 25%, test each 25% and then apply the winner to the 50%.
- gs7 15y agoThat's a great suggestion, thanks a lot!