Which would probably have the greatest difference between the median and the mean, a data representing the weight of 100 adult chickens or data representing the weight of 100 adult dogs? PLEASE Explain your answer.
PLEASE HELP!
PLEASE HELP!
-
In a perfect normal distribution there would of course be no difference between mean and median weights.
Still, in a real world situation, chicken farming produces a pretty homogeneous creature. That is, one chicken is much like another so the distribution of chicken weights would be relatively narrow in comparison with the distribution of dog weights The mean and median weights for the dogs would be much greater greater than those for the chickens, so on an absolute basis the Δ weight would be greater for the dogs even if it were to be the same on a normalized basis.
However, because of the much broader distribution of dog weights, even on a sample as large as 100, the normalized Δ weight might also be a bit larger for the dogs.
Still, in a real world situation, chicken farming produces a pretty homogeneous creature. That is, one chicken is much like another so the distribution of chicken weights would be relatively narrow in comparison with the distribution of dog weights The mean and median weights for the dogs would be much greater greater than those for the chickens, so on an absolute basis the Δ weight would be greater for the dogs even if it were to be the same on a normalized basis.
However, because of the much broader distribution of dog weights, even on a sample as large as 100, the normalized Δ weight might also be a bit larger for the dogs.
-
If a dog or chicken weighed much more or less than the others, it would significantly affect the mean. However, the median isn't affected as much by extreme values.