Mean And Median With Penis Size Statistics

I’ve posted on here a number of times about statistics and size and I am wondering if there is a thread where someone discusses these concepts in specific detail. I know it comes up on a lot of threads, but for many of the studies it doesn’t make a lot of sense.

As an example I’ll use the hebernick study.

In this the median is 12, but the breakdown 50% under the 123-128 mm line for girth and a similar situation for length.

At the study on “the-penis.com” there is a median of 5” girth but it allocates 50% at 5.25 and above.

I’m just curious if someone can explain. Thanks!

mean is the result of a sum of all the measurement, and divide by the number of measurements.
Imagine 5 guys with these measurements: 11,11,11,12,18. Mean is
12,6. a value not listed in the original measurements.

median is the value located at the middle value of the measurements: 11

Contrary to what intuition would tell you, mean is not necesarily the most frequent value among the sampled penises. It indicates in a court of perfect justice, how much penis should receive each male.
The median tells you exactly the number that is in the middle of the range. So if the largest man is jonah falcon with 36cm and smallest is 3cm, the number at the center is the median: 16,5 Much larger than the mean or average.
The “mode” is another value that would tell you the most frequent penis. The one most guys have. as example if mode is 14cm, means maybe mean is 13, but most frequently girls would find a 14cm penis inside males clothes, if it happens that being 14 the most frequent, there are more micropenis than macropenisies pulling the mean down a bit. :D

Thank you. That’s an excellent breakdown of mean, median, mode. I looked back at my old post and realized how unclear I had been.

I’m actually quite familiar with those concepts and statistics at a rudimentary level.

What I am wondering is if you look at it one step deeper how people come up with certain numbers in studies. I suppose when it comes down to it, this is as much for my own knowledge of stats as it is for size, but I noticed it on a particular thread.

To clarify further:

Many studies site say a median of 5” girth, but in the breakdown they’ll also say 5” is the “cumulative value” meaning the 50th percentile Mark.

An example of this is the study on “the-penis”
But if 5” is the first 50th percent, and 5.25” and above is the rest of the 50th. Why isn’t that 5.125” as the median?

Another example as debated here on the comments:

condom size and facts: Erect penile length and circumference dimensions: a new internet survey - Need for a wider range of condom sizes

The median girth is 12 and length is 14, but this study uses a numerical coding and not true centimeters, so wouldn’t the median actually be higher than 12 and 14, per the numerical coding?

This appears to involve a higher level understanding of midpoint analysis and I’m wondering if anyone with a statistics background can explain this phenomena?

It appears in the hebernick study the data is skewed left, but the median is still higher than be mean for both length and girth.

I’m probably digging kind of deep, but that’s the way my brain works, so it’d be great to understand this further.

Thank you!

they are just trying to increase the precission of the mean and median by putting together several studies and creating like a average soup.

the same was done by these guys in a more visual way:

i think it´s a very reliable comparison that allow you to see how you compare to others

How does all of this information help one gain size?

in no way…. that´s true

I found renewed motivation when I focused on myself and not how I compared to others. There’s only one me.

Yes I agree
but i understand the anxiety.
Many guy´s motivation is “quest to be average” and similar mottos… i dont know…

Thank you for the responses. This is probably the wrong place to ask this question if nothing else.

I understand the dangers that come with comparing oneself down to the millimeter. As someone who has suffered and to some extent recovered from the over-analyzing and excessive comparison, I do think it can be helpful to have a greater understanding of the statistics, so long as you’re not obsessively comparing yourself, but Titleist, I do see your point that this post doesn’t necessarily add to the main goal of the forum.