3 ms·

I get annoyed when I read things like: "A performed 4.9% better than B", when the comparison is between two proportions. Just say it like it is, without puttin

by e-dard 14y ago

I get annoyed when I read things like: "A performed 4.9% better than B", when the comparison is between two proportions. Just say it like it is, without putting a slant on it - A's response rate was 0.6% higher than B's. I don't care if the results are significantly different, if the difference between the two samples is so small.

ezl 14y ago
i don't really understand why this is "putting a slant on it". citing an absolute difference isn't very useful when you're talking about differences in conversion rates. * 0.6% -> 1.2% is a 0.6% bump. * 49.4% -> 50.0% is a 0.6% bump. however, in the first case, you're talking about doubling your conversion rate. it sounds like you're saying that if someone increases their landing page conversion rate by 1% (from 1%) you'd rather hear that the conversion rate increased by a point. the business owner is probably more interested in the fact that their revenues doubled.
- jmduke 14y ago
  While I don't disagree with you, this is a false dichotomy. A proper analysis of the findings should have reported -- and explained -- both absolute and relative differences.
  - hnr 14y ago
    The article shouldn't have to spell out absolute differences in English sentences. The article mentions the important part (relative difference) in English sentences. The article includes the chart of the response rate by race the reader can see everything: race response rate black 11.01% white 12.32% hispanic 12.92%
- jmduke 14y ago
  While I don't disagree with you, this is a false dichotomy. A proper analysis of the findings should have reported -- and explained -- both absolute and relative differences.
hnr 14y ago
This is an important point concerning Effect Sizes: "I don't care if the results are significantly different, if the difference between the two samples is so small". People do get too wrapped up in statistical significance and forget about practical significance. However, the relative difference (4.9%) is the relevant metric to be looking at as noted by "ezl" in a comment.

by e-dard 14y ago

ezl 14y ago

i don't really understand why this is "putting a slant on it". citing an absolute difference isn't very useful when you're talking about differences in conversion rates. * 0.6% -> 1.2% is a 0.6% bump. * 49.4% -> 50.0% is a 0.6% bump. however, in the first case, you're talking about doubling your conversion rate. it sounds like you're saying that if someone increases their landing page conversion rate by 1% (from 1%) you'd rather hear that the conversion rate increased by a point. the business owner is probably more interested in the fact that their revenues doubled.

jmduke 14y ago
While I don't disagree with you, this is a false dichotomy. A proper analysis of the findings should have reported -- and explained -- both absolute and relative differences.
- hnr 14y ago
  The article shouldn't have to spell out absolute differences in English sentences. The article mentions the important part (relative difference) in English sentences. The article includes the chart of the response rate by race the reader can see everything: race response rate black 11.01% white 12.32% hispanic 12.92%
jmduke 14y ago
While I don't disagree with you, this is a false dichotomy. A proper analysis of the findings should have reported -- and explained -- both absolute and relative differences.

hnr 14y ago

This is an important point concerning Effect Sizes: "I don't care if the results are significantly different, if the difference between the two samples is so small". People do get too wrapped up in statistical significance and forget about practical significance. However, the relative difference (4.9%) is the relevant metric to be looking at as noted by "ezl" in a comment.