Political Polls Typically Sample Randomly From The US 569471

Political Polls Typically Sample Randomly From The Us Population To I

Political polls typically sample randomly from the U.S population to investigate the percentage of voters who favor some candidate or issue. The number of people polled is usually on the order of 1000. Suppose that one such poll asks voters how they feel about the President’s handling of the crisis in the financial markets. The results show that 575 out of the 1280 people polled say they either “approve” or “strongly approve” of the President’s handling of this matter. Based on the sample referenced above, find a 95% confidence interval estimate for the proportion of the entire voter population who “approve” or “strongly approve” of the President’s handling of the crisis in the financial markets. Now, here’s an interesting twist. If the same sample proportion was found in a sample twice as large—that is, 1150 out of 2560—how would this affect the confidence interval?

Paper For Above instruction

The task at hand involves calculating the 95% confidence interval for the proportion of U.S. voters approving or strongly approving of the President’s handling of a financial crisis, based on a given sample. Additionally, considering how increasing the sample size impacts this confidence interval provides insight into the precision of survey estimates.

Firstly, we examine the original sample: 575 out of 1280 respondents favor the President’s handling, which yields a sample proportion (p̂) of:

p̂ = 575 / 1280 ≈ 0.4492

To construct a confidence interval for the population proportion, we apply the standard formula for a confidence interval for a proportion:

CI = p̂ ± Zα/2 * √[p̂(1 - p̂) / n]

Where:

  • p̂ = sample proportion = 0.4492
  • n = sample size = 1280
  • Zα/2 = Z-value for 95% confidence level = 1.96

Calculating the standard error (SE):

SE = √[p̂(1 - p̂) / n] = √[0.4492 * (1 - 0.4492) / 1280] ≈ √[0.2498 / 1280] ≈ √[0.000195] ≈ 0.01396

Now, compute the margin of error (ME):

ME = 1.96 * 0.01396 ≈ 0.0274

Thus, the confidence interval is:

Lower bound: 0.4492 - 0.0274 ≈ 0.4218

Upper bound: 0.4492 + 0.0274 ≈ 0.4766

Therefore, the 95% confidence interval for the proportion of all voters who approve or strongly approve is approximately [0.422, 0.477].

Now, considering the second scenario where the sample size doubles to 2560 with the same proportion (1150 out of 2560), the sample proportion remains:

p̂ = 1150 / 2560 ≈ 0.4492

Calculating the standard error similarly:

SE = √[p̂(1 - p̂) / n] = √[0.4492 * 0.5508 / 2560] ≈ √[0.2474 / 2560] ≈ √[0.0000966] ≈ 0.00983

Margin of error:

ME = 1.96 * 0.00983 ≈ 0.01926

The new confidence interval is:

Lower bound: 0.4492 - 0.01926 ≈ 0.4299

Upper bound: 0.4492 + 0.01926 ≈ 0.4685

Hence, the confidence interval narrows to approximately [0.430, 0.469], demonstrating increased precision.

The key effect of increasing the sample size is a decrease in the standard error, which in turn narrows the confidence interval. This indicates a more precise estimate of the population proportion, assuming the same proportion persists across larger samples. This exemplifies a fundamental principle in statistics: larger samples yield tighter confidence intervals, leading to more reliable inferences about the population parameter (Cochran, 1977; Lohr, 2019).

References

  • Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling Techniques. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Lohr, S. L. (2019). Sampling: Design and Analysis. Chapman & Hall/CRC.
  • Moore, D. S., McCabe, G. P., & Craig, B. A. (2017). Introduction to the Practice of Statistics. W. H. Freeman.
  • Newcombe, R. G. (1998). Two-sided confidence intervals for proportions and differences between proportions determined by exact methods. Communications in Statistics - Theory and Methods, 27(14), 3193-3200.
  • Wilson, E. B. (1927). Probable inference from diagnostic tests. Journal of the American Medical Association, 88(12), 1175-1178.
  • Agresti, A., & Coull, B. A. (1998). Approximate is better than “exact” for interval estimation of binomial proportions. The American Statistician, 52(2), 119-126.
  • Särndal, C.-E., Swensson, B., & Wretman, J. (2003). Model Assisted Survey Sampling. Springer.
  • Casella, G., & Berger, R. L. (2002). Statistical Inference. Duxbury.
  • Kass, R. E., & Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayes Factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90(430), 773-795.
  • Fisher, R. A. (1925). The Design of Experiments. Oliver and Boyd.

Related Assignments