How to find the sample size for known population
To find the sample size for a known population, you can use the following formula:
n = (Z^2 * p * (1-p)) / e^2
Where:
- n = sample size
- Z = Z-score (corresponding to your desired level of confidence)
- p = proportion of the population with a certain trait or characteristic (if unknown, use 0.5 for a conservative estimate)
- e = margin of error (maximum allowable distance between the sample estimate and true population value)
Here's a step-by-step breakdown of how to use this formula:
1. Determine the desired confidence level (usually 95% or 99%).
2. Find the corresponding Z-score using a Z-score table or calculator.
3. Determine the proportion (p) of the population with the trait or characteristic you're interested in studying. If unknown, use 0.5 for a conservative estimate.
4. Determine the desired margin of error (e) - typically this is set at +/- 3% or +/-5%.
5. Plug in all the values into the formula and solve for n.
For example, let's say you want to conduct a survey to determine the proportion of adults in a city who own a car, with a 95% confidence level and a margin of error of +/- 3%. If you know that the population size is 100,000 and assume that the proportion of car owners in the population is 0.6, you would use the following formula:
n = (Z^2 * p * (1-p)) / e^2
n = (1.96^2 * 0.6 * (1-0.6)) / 0.03^2
n = 752.25
So you would need a sample size of 752 adults to achieve your desired margin of error and confidence level.
Drag and drop the characteristics to the correct European nation. Characteristics may be used more than once.
Claimed the east coast of South America
Imported enslaved Africans
Sugar was the valuable export
Conqured Argentina and Uruguay
Which facts Characteristics go in which colonization. The Spanish colonization or the Portuguese colonization?
Claimed the east coast of South America: Portuguese colonization
Imported enslaved Africans: Both Spanish and Portuguese colonization
Sugar was the valuable export: Portuguese colonization
Conquered Argentina and Uruguay: Spanish colonization
How has democracy in South America affected the region?
The impact of democracy in South America has been mixed. While the emergence of democracy in the region has resulted in some positive changes such as increased political participation, the protection of civil rights and the freedom of speech, it has also led to some challenges.
One of the most significant challenges has been the difficulty in establishing stable democratic institutions. Some countries in the region have struggled with political instability, corruption, and continuing economic inequalities, leading to widespread public discontent.
On the other hand, several South American countries have managed to build relatively strong democratic institutions, such as in Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay. These countries have made progress in reducing poverty and inequality, promoting economic growth, and upholding human rights.
Overall, while the region's democratic transition has brought about some positive changes in terms of political and civil rights, the impact of democracy on economic development and social justice remains a challenge in many countries. The progress of democracy in South America is still ongoing, and the future of the region remains uncertain.
What was one effect of the development of agriculture in South America?
One significant effect of the development of agriculture in South America was the growth and transformation of human societies. Agriculture allowed people to settle in one place and develop permanent settlements, forming communities and cities.
As agriculture became more productive, the population grew, allowing for the development of more complex social and political structures. Large-scale agricultural production, such as the cultivation of maize, potatoes, and squash in the Andes, allowed for the emergence of powerful states like the Inca Empire.
The development of agriculture also spurred innovation, such as the introduction of irrigation systems to improve crop yields in arid regions and the domestication of new plant and animal species.
Furthermore, the availability of food surplus allowed for the rise of trade and commerce. Through the trading of crops, crafts, and other goods, regional networks and connections were established, which facilitated the movement of ideas, culture, and technology.
Overall, the development of agriculture in South America was a significant catalyst for social, political, and economic changes, transforming the continent's human societies and shaping its history.
How are quips different from records kept by European and Asian societies at around the same time?
Quipus were a system of knot-tying used by the Inca Empire to record information, while Europeans and Asians societies had developed systems of writing that used symbols and letters to create written records.
Unlike the writing systems used in Europe and Asia, quipus were a non-alphabetic, non-numeric, and non-ideographic system of record-keeping that used knots tied in different ways on a string or cord to represent information. Each knot, its position on the string, and the color or material of the string could convey different types of information such as census data, tax records, calendars, and descriptions of events.
Unlike written records, which could be read and understood by anyone who knew the writing system, quipus were mainly used by Inca officials who had been trained to interpret the intricacies of the knot-tying system. This limited the accessibility and readability of the information stored in quipus.
Moreover, while European and Asian societies' records were often written on durable materials such as parchment or paper, quipus were typically made of natural materials like wool, cotton, or fibers from the bark of trees, and have been subject to significant degradation over time.
Overall, quipus and European and Asian societies' written records differ in terms of the medium, the technique used for record-keeping, its readability and accessibility, and its durability. Nonetheless, quipus were an important tool for record-keeping and played a crucial role in the Inca administration and governance.
Simon Bolivar is best known for
Simon Bolivar is best known for his role as a leader in the struggle for independence against Spanish colonial rule in South America during the early 19th century. He played a key role in leading the liberation of Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia, Peru, and Panama from Spanish colonial rule, earning him the nickname "The Liberator."
Bolivar was a military strategist and visionary who sought to unite the various independent territories in South America into a single confederation of republics. He believed that the different regions of South America had a shared cultural heritage and history, and sought to unite them under a common banner of liberation and independence.
In addition to his military campaigns, Bolivar was an influential political thinker who wrote extensively on issues such as democracy, liberty, and the role of government. He advocated for a strong, centralized government that was accountable to the people and based on principles of representative democracy.
Bolivar's legacy is celebrated throughout South America, and he is widely regarded as one of the most important figures in the continent's history, credited with successfully leading the fight against colonialism and paving the way for the development of modern, independent states in the region.
Unstable post-independence governments in South America were further weakened by
The unstable post-independence governments in South America were further weakened by several factors. These include:
1. Economic instability: The newly independent South American countries faced significant economic challenges, including a lack of industrialization, limited access to foreign capital, and dependence on exports of primary goods. These factors made it difficult for governments to generate revenue and lead to frequent financial crises.
2. Political instability: Most of the newly independent South American countries lacked stable political institutions, democratic traditions, and experienced leaders, leading to weak governments and frequent power struggles.
3. Social inequality: The legacy of colonialism and the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small elite created deep social inequalities that fueled discontent and social unrest.
4. Regionalism: The newly independent countries were often divided along regional lines, with distinct cultural, linguistic, and economic differences that made it difficult for governments to implement policies that addressed the needs of the entire country.
5. External interventions: The Great Powers of Europe, particularly Britain and France, continued to hold economic and strategic influence in South America, which contributed to political instability and even led to wars.
All these factors made it challenging for the newly independent South American countries to establish stable and effective governments. The effects of these challenges continued to be felt in the region for decades after independence, and many countries have struggled to overcome them to this day.