Stratified Random Sampling:

1. A university has 807 faculty members. For each faculty member, the number of refereed

publications was recorded. A frequency table for number of refereed publications is given

below for a simple random sample of 50 faculty members.

Refereed Publications 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Faculty Members 28 4 3 4 4 2 1 0 2 1 1

a. Estimate the mean number of refereed publications by faculty members in the university,

µ, and place a bound on the error of estimation, B.

11
1
mean number of refereed publication= ()[ ∑ x ∗n ]
n i=0 i i

Mean number =

( 501 )∗[ 0∗28+1∗4 +2∗3+ 3∗4+ 4∗4 +5∗2+ 6∗1+7∗0+ 8∗2+ 9∗1+10∗1 ] = 1.78
11
Bound of error of estimation = +standard deviation = ±
√( 1
)
[ x i− x́ ] = 7.90
n−1 ∑i=0

So, bound of error of estimation on mean number of refereed publications is +7.90

b. Estimate the total number of refereed publications by faculty members in the university,

r, and place a bound on the error of estimation, B.

Total number of refereed publications by faculty members in university = N*mean

number of refereed publications

Total number = 807*1.78 = 1436.46

 11
Bound of error of estimation = +standard deviation = ±
√( )
1
[ x i− x́ ] = 7.54
n ∑i=0

Bound of error of estimation = + 7.54

c. Estimate the proportion, p, of faculty with no publications and place a bound on the

error of estimation, B.

28 4 3 4 4 2 1 0 2 1 1
0.56 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.02 0 0.04 0.02 0.02

Estimate of proportion = (28/50) = 0.56

11
Bound on error of estimate = ±
√( )
1
[ x i− x́ ] where x́=0.09∧n=11
n ∑i=0

Bound on error of estimate = +0.16

2. Above, data on numbers of refereed publications were given for a simple random sample

of 50 faculty members. Not all departments were represented, however, in the simple

random sample. The following data are from a stratified random sample of faculty members,

using biological sciences, physical sciences, social sciences, and humanities as the strata.

Number of Faculty Number ofFaculty

Stratum
Members in Stratum Members in
Biological Sciences 102 7
Sample
Physical Sciences 310 19
Social Sciences 217 13
Humanities 178 11

Total 807 50
 The frequency distribution for number of publications in the strata is given below.

Number Biological Physical Social Humanitie

0 1 10 9 8
1 2 2 0 2
2 0 0 1 0
3 1 1 0 1
4 0 2 2 0
5 2 1 0 0
6 0 1 1 0
7 1 0 0 0
8 0 2 0 0

Number Biologi Physic Social

cal al Humanit
Publicati Scienc Total
Science Scienc es ies
ons
s es
0 1 10 9 8 28
1 2 2 0 2 6
2 0 0 1 0 1
3 1 1 0 1 3
4 0 2 2 0 4
5 2 1 0 0 3
6 0 1 1 0 2
7 1 0 0 0 1
8 0 2 0 0 2
0.77777 2.1111 1.4444
Mean(y) 8 11 44 1.222222
0.83333 3.0595 2.9202
SD 3 93 36 2.635231
Median 1 1 0 0
N 7 19 13 11 50
N 102 310 217 178 807

a. Estimate the total number of refereed publications by faculty members in the university,

r, and place a bound on the error of estimation, B.

Total number of refereed publication = ∑ N i y i

 [102∗0.78+310+2.11 +217∗1.44+178∗1.22] = 921.31

 ni S D2
bound on error of estimate for total number of refereed publicationis givenas=∑ N i 1−
2
( Ni )( ) n

bound on error of estimate =

0.832 3.062 2.922 2.64 2

( )[ (
1
807 2
2
102 1−
7
102 )( 7 ) 2
(
+310 1−
19
310 )( 19 ) 2
(
+217 1−
13
217 )( 13 ) (
2
+ 178 1−
11
178 )( 11 )]
=0.1432

estimate of population total with2 SD bound on error of estimate

 921.31+2√ 0.1432

 921.31+0.76

b. How does your estimate for question #2.a compare with the result from the simple

random sample in question #1.b?

The estimate for #2a is smaller when compared with the result from the simple random

sample in question #1.b because of the stratification

c. Estimate the proportion, p, of faculty with no publications and place a bound on the

error of estimation, B.

3. 28 4 3 4 4 2 1 0 2 1 1
0.56 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.02 0 0.04 0.02 0.02

Estimate of proportion = (28/50) = 0.56

11
Bound on error of estimate = ±
√( )
1
[ x i− x́ ] where x́=0.09∧n=11
n ∑i=0

Bound on error of estimate = +0.16

a. Did stratification in question #2.c increase precision relative to your estimate for question
#1.c? Explain why you think it did or did not.

No, this is because we get exactly same value for #2.c as compared to that of the #1.c. So,

we can say that there is no increase in the precision relative to the estimate for question

#1.c.