# Bootstrap confidence intervals when sample size is really small

TL;DR A sample table from the full results for data that look like this Table 1: Coverage of 95% bca CIs. parameter n=5 n=10 n=20 n=40 n=80 means Control 81.4 87.6 92.2 93.0 93.6 b4GalT1-/- 81.3 90.2 90.8 93.0 93.8 difference in means diff 83.

# Reporting effects as relative differences...with a confidence interval

Researchers frequently report results as relative effects, for example, “Male flies from selected lines had 50% larger upwind flight ability than male flies from control lines (Control mean: 117.5 cm/s; Selected mean 176.5 cm/s).” where a relative effect is $$$100 \frac{\bar{y}_B - \bar{y}_A}{\bar{y}_A}$$$ If we are to follow best practices, we should present this effect with a measure of uncertainty, such as a confidence interval. The absolute effect is 59.

#### R doodles. Some ecology. Some physiology. Much fake data.

Thoughts on R, statistical best practices, and teaching applied statistics to Biology majors.

Jeff Walker, Professor of Biological Sciences

University of Southern Maine, Portland, Maine, United States