In BN 2.20 we found that out of 594 people asked (students, researchers), 281 re
ID: 3174723 • Letter: I
Question
In BN 2.20 we found that out of 594 people asked (students, researchers), 281 reported that the right way to interpret a 95% confidence interval of 0.1 to 0.4 was to say that "the probability that the true proportion is bigger than 0 is at least 95%." What is wrong with that interpretation? That makes it sound like that 0 is in the interval 0.1 to 0.4. It is not. That makes it sound like the confidence interval is random. It is not. That makes it sound like the parameter is random. It is not. That makes it sound like the sample proportion is random. It is not.Explanation / Answer
True proportion is the value that is the proportion value assumed as from the populaiton. It is not computed but is known as a prior information . It is denoted as po and it is not a random variable. But the students made it sound like a random variable when they said that the probability that it is greater than 0 is at least 95%.
Therefore the correct answer choice for this question is d) The wrong with this interpretation is that they makes it sound like the sample proportion is random even though it is not.