StatCrunch logo (home)

StatCrunch ID:
Public profile for ugoagwu
Shared data sets   |   Shared results   |   Shared reports

Showing 1 to 4 of 4 data sets
Data Set/Description Owner Last edited Size Views
For what survey produced it, see and inputs of all team mates. Towards the end, some validation was done, deleting data where working hours was less than a work day, or outliers to legally admissible work days. Finally arbitarily long chains which were less likely to be encountered in draws of simulated data (M/F, Degrees etc.. were discarded). A total of 12 observations were thus thrown out. All Credit goes to Team 3,the Instructor, our unnamed Friends in the Nursing profession who enthusiastically did a last minute push through over their extended social media groups for data and the respondents who kindly took out time for the survey. Another thought is about the distribution of hours worked. Wven if random, it "should be" "centered on" certain hours a day* number of days, with deviations from centre penalised, while picking a sample.. The observations 38 appear many times for example, however without an explainable reason (we are talking of work-distribution among nursing staff sample) So do "primes" "47, 37, 29" It is not to argue that they "shouldn't occur", but there has to be some reason for their being so significant/vibrant. At this stage we may conclude that most of the respondents may not have been under full-time nursing employments in strict sense of the term. 42, 48,72,60, 50,40 appearing more often would give us less variation but more regularity in the data. Since we haven't tried stratification, we do not know "how often they should occur". We thus do not re-draw observations.
ugoagwuJun 14, 20142KB1067
Survey For Registered NursesugoagwuMay 31, 2014330B97
Survey For Registered Nurses1.docxugoagwuMay 28, 201465KB19
Survey Questions1.docxugoagwuMay 27, 201461KB43


Always Learning