What effect does increasing the sample size n have on the sampling distribution of?

The variability that's shrinking when N increases is the variability of the sample mean, often expressed as standard error. Or, in other terms, the certainty of the veracity of the sample mean is increasing.

Imagine you run an experiment where you collect 3 men and 3 women and measure their heights. How certain are you that the mean heights of each group are the true mean of the separate populations of men and women? I should think that you wouldn't be very certain at all. You could easily collect new samples of 3 and find new means several inches from the first ones. Quite a few of the repeated experiments like this might even result in women being pronounced taller than men because the means would vary so much. With a low N you don't have much certainty in the mean from the sample and it varies a lot across samples.

Now imagine 10,000 observations in each group. It's going to be pretty hard to find new samples of 10,000 that have means that differ much from each other. They will be far less variable and you'll be more certain of their accuracy.

If you can accept this line of thinking then we can insert it into the calculations of your statistics as standard error. As you can see from it's equation, it's an estimation of a parameter, $\sigma$ (that should become more accurate as n increases) divided by a value that always increases with n, $\sqrt n$. That standard error is representing the variability of the means or effects in your calculations. The smaller it is, the more powerful your statistical test.

Here's a little simulation in R to demonstrate the relation between a standard error and the standard deviation of the means of many many replications of the initial experiment. In this case we'll start with a population mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15.

mu <- 100
s <- 50
n <- 5
nsim <- 10000 # number of simulations
# theoretical standard error
s / sqrt(n)
# simulation of experiment and the standard deviations of their means
y <- replicate( nsim, mean( rnorm(n, mu, s) ) )
sd(y)

Note how the final standard deviation is close to the theoretical standard error. By playing with the n variable here you can see the variability measure will get smaller as n increases.

[As an aside, kurtosis in the graphs isn't really changing (assuming they are normal distributions). Lowering the variance doesn't change the kurtosis but the distribution will look narrower. The only way to visually examine the kurtosis changes is put the distributions on the same scale.]

  1. Last updated
  2. Save as PDF
  • Page ID4584
  • Examples of the Central Limit Theorem

    Law of Large Numbers

    The law of large numbers says that if you take samples of larger and larger size from any population, then the mean of the sampling distribution, \(\mu_{\overline x}\) tends to get closer and closer to the true population mean, \(\mu\). From the Central Limit Theorem, we know that as \(n\) gets larger and larger, the sample means follow a normal distribution. The larger n gets, the smaller the standard deviation of the sampling distribution gets. (Remember that the standard deviation for the sampling distribution of \(\overline X\) is \(\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{n}}\).) This means that the sample mean \(\overline x\) must be closer to the population mean \(\mu\) as \(n\) increases. We can say that \(\mu\) is the value that the sample means approach as n gets larger. The Central Limit Theorem illustrates the law of large numbers.

    This concept is so important and plays such a critical role in what follows it deserves to be developed further. Indeed, there are two critical issues that flow from the Central Limit Theorem and the application of the Law of Large numbers to it. These are

    1. The probability density function of the sampling distribution of means is normally distributed regardless of the underlying distribution of the population observations and
    2. standard deviation of the sampling distribution decreases as the size of the samples that were used to calculate the means for the sampling distribution increases.

    Taking these in order. It would seem counterintuitive that the population may have any distribution and the distribution of means coming from it would be normally distributed. With the use of computers, experiments can be simulated that show the process by which the sampling distribution changes as the sample size is increased. These simulations show visually the results of the mathematical proof of the Central Limit Theorem.

    Here are three examples of very different population distributions and the evolution of the sampling distribution to a normal distribution as the sample size increases. The top panel in these cases represents the histogram for the original data. The three panels show the histograms for 1,000 randomly drawn samples for different sample sizes: \(n=10\), \(n= 25\) and \(n=50\). As the sample size increases, and the number of samples taken remains constant, the distribution of the 1,000 sample means becomes closer to the smooth line that represents the normal distribution.

    Figure \(\PageIndex{3}\) is for a normal distribution of individual observations and we would expect the sampling distribution to converge on the normal quickly. The results show this and show that even at a very small sample size the distribution is close to the normal distribution.

    Figure \(\PageIndex{3}\)

    Figure \(\PageIndex{4}\) is a uniform distribution which, a bit amazingly, quickly approached the normal distribution even with only a sample of 10.

    Figure \(\PageIndex{4}\)

    Figure \(\PageIndex{5}\) is a skewed distribution. This last one could be an exponential, geometric, or binomial with a small probability of success creating the skew in the distribution. For skewed distributions our intuition would say that this will take larger sample sizes to move to a normal distribution and indeed that is what we observe from the simulation. Nevertheless, at a sample size of 50, not considered a very large sample, the distribution of sample means has very decidedly gained the shape of the normal distribution.

    Figure \(\PageIndex{5}\)

    The Central Limit Theorem provides more than the proof that the sampling distribution of means is normally distributed. It also provides us with the mean and standard deviation of this distribution. Further, as discussed above, the expected value of the mean, \(\mu_{\overline{x}}\), is equal to the mean of the population of the original data which is what we are interested in estimating from the sample we took. We have already inserted this conclusion of the Central Limit Theorem into the formula we use for standardizing from the sampling distribution to the standard normal distribution. And finally, the Central Limit Theorem has also provided the standard deviation of the sampling distribution, \(\sigma_{\overline{x}}=\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{n}}\), and this is critical to have to calculate probabilities of values of the new random variable, \(\overline x\).

    Figure \(\PageIndex{6}\) shows a sampling distribution. The mean has been marked on the horizontal axis of the \(\overline X\)'s and the standard deviation has been written to the right above the distribution. Notice that the standard deviation of the sampling distribution is the original standard deviation of the population, divided by the sample size. We have already seen that as the sample size increases the sampling distribution becomes closer and closer to the normal distribution. As this happens, the standard deviation of the sampling distribution changes in another way; the standard deviation decreases as \(n\) increases. At very very large \(n\), the standard deviation of the sampling distribution becomes very small and at infinity it collapses on top of the population mean. This is what it means that the expected value of \(\mu_{\overline{x}}\) is the population mean, \(\mu\).

    Figure \(\PageIndex{6}\)

    At non-extreme values of \(n\), this relationship between the standard deviation of the sampling distribution and the sample size plays a very important part in our ability to estimate the parameters we are interested in.

    Figure \(\PageIndex{7}\) shows three sampling distributions. The only change that was made is the sample size that was used to get the sample means for each distribution. As the sample size increases, \(n\) goes from 10 to 30 to 50, the standard deviations of the respective sampling distributions decrease because the sample size is in the denominator of the standard deviations of the sampling distributions.

    Figure \(\PageIndex{7}\)

    The implications for this are very important. Figure \(\PageIndex{8}\) shows the effect of the sample size on the confidence we will have in our estimates. These are two sampling distributions from the same population. One sampling distribution was created with samples of size 10 and the other with samples of size 50. All other things constant, the sampling distribution with sample size 50 has a smaller standard deviation that causes the graph to be higher and narrower. The important effect of this is that for the same probability of one standard deviation from the mean, this distribution covers much less of a range of possible values than the other distribution. One standard deviation is marked on the \(\overline X\) axis for each distribution. This is shown by the two arrows that are plus or minus one standard deviation for each distribution. If the probability that the true mean is one standard deviation away from the mean, then for the sampling distribution with the smaller sample size, the possible range of values is much greater. A simple question is, would you rather have a sample mean from the narrow, tight distribution, or the flat, wide distribution as the estimate of the population mean? Your answer tells us why people intuitively will always choose data from a large sample rather than a small sample. The sample mean they are getting is coming from a more compact distribution. This concept will be the foundation for what will be called level of confidence in the next unit.

    Figure \(\PageIndex{8}\)

    What effect does increasing the sample size have on a sampling distribution?

    As the sample sizes increase, the variability of each sampling distribution decreases so that they become increasingly more leptokurtic. The range of the sampling distribution is smaller than the range of the original population.

    What happens when sample size n increases?

    The larger n gets, the smaller the standard deviation of the sampling distribution gets. (Remember that the standard deviation for the sampling distribution of ¯X is σ√n.) This means that the sample mean ¯x must be closer to the population mean μ as n increases.

    What effect does increasing the sample size n have on the center of the sampling distribution of sample means?

    As sample sizes increase, the sampling distributions approach a normal distribution. With "infinite" numbers of successive random samples, the mean of the sampling distribution is equal to the population mean (µ).

    What is the effect of increasing sample size on the sampling distribution and what does this mean in terms of the Central Limit Theorem?

    According to the central limit theorem, the mean of a sample of data will be closer to the mean of the overall population in question, as the sample size increases, notwithstanding the actual distribution of the data. In other words, the data is accurate whether the distribution is normal or aberrant.