Talk:Effective sample size

It would be helpful to put some reference to accompany "The case where the correlations are not uniform is somewhat more complicated". T 15:15, 15 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taurvil (talk • contribs)

A reference to the first Neff calculation should be made as I cannot find it anywhere else I the literature and in fact I have found different formulations giving different answers for the same values. The more standard Nee=N(1-r)/(1+r) where r = lag 1 correlation. 97.104.197.234 (talk) 17:15, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Should this article be merged with design effect?

Given that ESS is basically the inverse of design effect, I'm wondering if it makes more sense to merge it into design effect (specifically: make it a section there, and redirect this article to that section). What do others here think? Tal Galili (talk) 16:45, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

(cc users who've edited this page in the last 50 edits and may want to weigh in: User:Beland, User:GünniX, User:Michael Hardy, User:Shellwood, User:Qwfp - you're all great wiki editors, sorry if the ping is too blunt. Just don't want to have this discussion drag for a year :) ) Tal Galili (talk) 20:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

At a quick glance, it's unclear to me how they are related; both articles are too math-heavy to really be accessible to most readers. Some sort of visual explanation or non-equation example would help a lot. -- Beland (talk) 00:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Effective sample size = (1/(design effect)) - they have a simple linear relationship between the two. The fact that they are both difficult articles for someone not in the field, I agree (and I agree they should be improved). Tal Galili (talk) 07:24, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Redirected, as the summary is a concise summary which is sufficiently encyclopaedic, and the additional detail here is either unnecessary or overlaps with derivations elsewhere on the page. So, there was nothing to merge. Klbrain (talk) 10:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)