Jump to content


Photo

How to find how many are in a group?

group

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Family Tree

Family Tree

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 01:12 PM

Is there an easy way to find out how many individuals there are in a named group?

 

Rich

 



#2 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3442 posts

Posted 09 September 2015 - 02:20 PM

Reports->Lists->Statistics List
Select name of group from <People to include>

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#3 Family Tree

Family Tree

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 02:32 PM

Excellent. Thanks for your help!



#4 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3402 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 03:40 PM

Reports->Lists->Statistics List
Select name of group from <People to include>

 

It's a pretty neat report, except that I don't think it produces correct results in all cases. In particular, I ran it just now against a group of people where one of the individuals was married at age 72 (third marriage). The report said that the maximum age at marriage was 49.25.

 

I wonder if the multiple marriages caused the report not to produce correct results. Or I wonder if it's producing "correct" results, but the labeling on the marriage statistic should say "maximum age at first marriage" or some such as that. One problem in figuring it out is that it seems to be quite difficult (at least from within RM) to find out who that person was who was married at age 49.25. The only thing I can think of to do presently is to write an SQLite report.

 

Jerry



#5 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3442 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 05:25 PM

One problem in figuring it out is that it seems to be quite difficult (at least from within RM) to find out who that person was who was married at age 49.25. The only thing I can think of to do presently is to write an SQLite report.


You're certainly right. For starters, trying to use:

Marriage - age - equals - XX

produces incorrect results

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#6 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3402 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 06:53 PM

You're certainly right. For starters, trying to use:

Marriage - age - equals - XX

produces incorrect results

 

Hmm. I'm not sure if you were being facetious or not, but I just said "duh!" to myself and searched for Marriage - age - equals - 49 and it indeed found the person who was 49.25 when married (he married about 3 months after his 49th birthday). Well, the group is color coded and my search was really for Marriage - age - equals - 49 AND Color coding - is - Green, and it worked just great.

 

I have confirmed that Marriage - age - equals - 72 does find the person who was married three times and who was age 72 at the time of the third marriage (and similarly, searches by age of marriage for several other individuals with multiple marriages works just fine). So searching by RM Explorer is not confused by the multiple marriages. And I have confirmed that the person who was age 72 at the time of the third marriage really is in the group, and that I really did give the correct group to Reports->Lists->Statistics List. So there appears to be a bug in Reports->Lists->Statistics List, at least with regard to maximum age of marriage.

 

So mea culpa on needing to use SQLite. RM tools were more than adequate to the task at hand.

 

Jerry



#7 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3402 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 07:12 PM

I created a test database containing three people. Here is a narrative report of everybody in the database.

1.  John Doe was born in 1850.
John Doe and Jane Smith were married in 1870. Jane Smith was born in 1849.
John Doe and Elizabeth Smith were married in 1880. Elizabeth Smith was born in 1855.

Here follows a statistics report of everybody in the database.

Individual Statistics	All	Male	Female	Unknown
Individuals Selected	3	1	2	0
Individuals with marriage event	3	1	2	0
    Average age at marriage	22.00	20.00	23.00	NA
    Minimum age at marriage	20.00	20.00	21.00	NA
    Maximum age at marriage	25.00	20.00	25.00	NA
Individuals with death age	0	0	0	0
    Average age at death	NA	NA	NA	NA
    Minimum age at death	NA	NA	NA	NA
    Maximum age at death	NA	NA	NA	NA


Individual Statistics	All	Male	Female	Unknown
Married Individuals	3	1	2	0
    Average marriages per person	1.33	2.00	1.00	NA
    Minimum marriages per person	1.00	2.00	1.00	NA
    Maximum marriages per person	2.00	2.00	1.00	NA
    Average children per family	0.00	0.00	0.00	NA
    Minimum children per family	0.00	0.00	0.00	NA
    Maximum children per family	0.00	0.00	0.00	NA

The minimum age age at marriage of 20 years reflects John Doe's age in 1870 when he married Jane Smith (Jane was 21). The maximum age at marriage of 25 years reflects Elizabeth Smith's age in 1880 when she married John Doe. But John Doe was 30 years old in 1880, so that's what the maximum age at marriage should be. IMHO. (Note that the same person has both the minimum age at marriage and the maximum age at marriage, which is entirely possible when multiple marriages are taken into account.).

 

Jerry



#8 kbens0n

kbens0n

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3442 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 07:17 PM

Hmm. I'm not sure if you were being facetious or not...


Wasn't being facetious, but wasn't using RootsMagic Explorer directly. Creating a named group using Mark Group and Select people by data fields results in members of the named group who do not match the

Marriage - age - equals - XX

criteria for me.

EDIT:
Whatever I did, it was *ME* not RootsMagic. I obviously goofed somewhere in my marking or unmarking experiment, typical (and expected) human error, *WINK*, so deleted the group, ran the database tools and started over. Sorry for the noise.

---
--- "GENEALOGY, n. An account of one's descent from an ancestor who did not particularly care to trace his own." - Ambrose Bierce
--- "The trouble ain't what people don't know, it's what they know that ain't so." - Josh Billings
---Ô¿Ô---
K e V i N


#9 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3402 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 08:10 PM

Creating a named group using Mark Group and Select people by data fields results in members of the named group who do not match the

Marriage - age - equals - XX

criteria for me.

 

It seems to work just fine for me. As a test, I created a group in my production database for Marriage -> age -> equals ->15 (317 people in the group). I put the group in the Side panel and just scrolled up and down looking at the marriage age at the top of the page. Most everybody showed that they were married at age 15. The occasional person wouldn't match age 15, but everybody that didn't match had more than one marriage and one of the marriages was age 15. For example, I'm looking at somebody right now who married first at age 15 and married second at age 68. The top of the screen shows the marriage age as 68. I guess it shows age 68 rather than age 15 because the spouse that's being shown in the main view is the one she married at age 68.

 

Jerry



#10 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3402 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 08:18 PM

And I guess that if you wanted all the people who were married at age equal xx without any other marriages, just mark everybody for whom marriage exists is true, unmark everybody who was married at age greater than xx, and unmark everybody was married at age less than xx. Except maybe for a little problem with text dates, that should leave only people married at exactly age xx and who weren't also married at a different age.

 

Well, there still might be some strangeness about people married before a date, married after a date, and people married between dates. It's not a totally trivial problem, especially when there are multiple marriages. But within the group I'm working in, everybody has exact dates for all their marriages.

 

Jerry



#11 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3402 posts

Posted 11 September 2015 - 06:52 AM

I was just looking a little more closely at the sample statistics report that I posted above. It includes the following information: "Individuals with marriage event 3". That is literally true. The three individuals with marriage events are John Doe, Jane Smith, and Elizabeth Smith. But IMHO opinion, it's very suggestive of a serious programming error. Much more meaningful would be information on "Number of marriage events 4".

 

The 4 marriage events are John Doe age 20 to Jane Smith, Jane Smith age 21 to John Doe, John Doe age 30 to Elizabeth Smith, and Elizabeth Smith age 25 to John Doe. So the minimum marriage age is 20, the maximum marriage age is 30, and the average marriage age is 24.0 (just add 20 + 21 + 25 + 30 and divide by 4). The RM report gets the numbers completely wrong, and it's suggestive that it's reporting the number of people with marriages rather than the number of marriages. It appears to be omitting John Doe age 30 married to Elizabeth Smith entirely from its statistics. For example, 20 + 21 + 25 divided by 3 is 22, which is exactly what the report prints out for the average age of marriage.

 

Jerry



#12 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6145 posts

Posted 11 September 2015 - 11:23 AM

Do the averages change when you alternate the selected spouse in John Doe's Family View?


Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#13 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3402 posts

Posted 11 September 2015 - 01:22 PM

Changing which spouse is displayed in Family View makes no difference. Changing the order of the spouses with Edit -> Rearrange -> Spouses does make a difference. 

 

For John Doe's marriage, the statistics are based on only one marriage with that marriage being the marriage with the first spouse being based on how I have the spouses arranged, not with the first marriage in date order. In my setup, John married Jane in 1870 and he married Elizabeth in 1880. With the spouses in that order, the statistics for John are based only on his marriage to Jane. When I swap the order of the spouses (without changing any of the dates of the marriages), the statistics for John are based only on his marriage to Elizabeth.

 

I think the statistics are totally incorrect unless they take both marriages into account for John.

 

If you are careful to order spouses in your database in marriage date order (something that RM does not do for you automatically), then it could be said that the marriage age statistics are all based on the age for each person at their first marriage. If you are not careful about the order of spouses, then you can get some sort of strange and random results from the report.

 

Jerry

 



#14 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6145 posts

Posted 12 September 2015 - 05:52 AM

Another 'feature' that does not live up to reasonable expectations.


Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#15 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8314 posts

Posted 14 September 2015 - 09:52 AM

To me it makes sense to report the average age of marriage as the first marriage listed for the person. If someone asked me how old I was when I got married I would say my first marriage age. I wouldn't average all my marriage ages together. (even thought I've only been married once). What your trying to find is how young a person was when they first married.

 

I ran the Statistics List with just those 3 individuals in a group. It appears to be reporting correctly for me.

Average age at marriage: 22  (first marriage age at 20, 21, 25 divided by 3)

Minimum age at marriage: 20 (lowest minimum age for first marriage)

Maxium age at marriage: 25 (highest age for first marriage)


Renee
RootsMagic

#16 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6145 posts

Posted 14 September 2015 - 10:39 AM

Renee, that would be logically correct if the statistic was labelled:

Average|Minimum|Maximum age at first marriage

 

Run the report on just one person who has multiple marriages and all these stats are the same - i.e., providing no further information than the one stat "Min age at marriage". Avg|Max age stats for this one person should say something about this person, esp the Max stat. Avg is kind of meaningless for one person without other info such as standard deviation...


Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#17 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8314 posts

Posted 14 September 2015 - 10:54 AM

Confirming enhancement request to note first marriage on Statistics Report has been added.


Renee
RootsMagic

#18 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3402 posts

Posted 14 September 2015 - 10:55 AM

It would obviously help if the labeling were changed to say "date of first marriage". But even if that is the intent of the report, there is still a serious bug in that the ordering of the spouses influences the outcome. It doesn't necessarily use the actual first marriage. Renee's test case was just lucky to get the right answer.

 

But I would question the intent of the report. I have marriages in my database at age 90 and and above (not first marriages, but real marriages nonetheless). Wouldn't you like to know about such marriages in a statistical report?

 

Maybe the report needs two options: first marriages only, and all marriages. And for the first marriages only option, it needs to be sure it is using the first marriage. It doesn't the way it works now.

 

Jerry

.



#19 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8314 posts

Posted 14 September 2015 - 10:56 AM

Added Jerry's suggestion to the enhancement request too.


Renee
RootsMagic