Key result
A sample size of three in the Fry Sampling Procedure is inadequate for estimating a book's mean readability level due to high standard errors, broad confidence intervals, and high Type II error risk.
The Fry sampling procedure using a sample size of three is inadequate for reliably estimating a book's mean readability level.
Three-sample Fry estimates carry high uncertainty; leaves open optimal sample sizes for reliable readability assessment.
sampling reliability of the procedure recommended by Fry in estimating a given book's mean readability level. Two distinct but related data analyses were undertaken: 1) a computation of confidence intervals based on variable sample sizes, and 2) a computation of power functions based on variable sample sizes. A sample size of three was found to be inadequate in estimating population readability means because 1) the standard error among samples is frequently very high; 2) the confidence intervals on samples of three are often so broad as to be of little value in locating the true population mean; and 3) the probability of Type II errors is unacceptably high with this sample size.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gisela G. Fitzgerald (1980) studied this question. Fry Sampling Procedure was evaluated on Estimating population readability means. A sample size of three in the Fry Sampling Procedure is inadequate for estimating a book's mean readability level due to high standard errors, broad confidence intervals, and high Type II error risk.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: