*that population must be able to be considered a representative sample drawn from a virtual population of infinite size whose structure is explained by the same causes that the population considered*.

* *

Some populations are therefore not "statistisable" (please forgive this neologism). For sure we can count their individuals and calculate totals, averages, dispersions and correlations, then publish it all in tables and graphs: but this morass will be impossible to interpret, we cannot move from this description to an explanation.
This is the case, for example, for much of business statistics: it often happens that the production of a branch or sector is concentrated in a few large companies whose number is too low for this population being “statistisable".
There is a remedy: if it is impossible to interpret a statistical description, we will use the monograph. The search for causal relationships at work in the population will no longer consider distributions and correlations, but consider each individual case in its particular history.
Of course history never provides more than assumptions, because the past is essentially enigmatic, but after all statistics also provides in the best case only assumptions... but they are not of the same nature, and the monograph requires a depth of investigation which statistics does not require.
## No comments:

## Post a Comment