I agree. Non parametric may be better, but one is still very restricted by a very small data set. Look at the data.
Juanita Hatcher
> On Jul 24, 2018, at 2:33 PM, Robert Newcombe <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Exactly! The first step is to plot a scatter diagram. Also, on a dataset as small as this, there is no real positive assurance that parametric assumptions hold, and the correlation is particularly sensitive to distributional assumptions. So I suggest a non-parametric correlation rather than a parametric one anyway. With the proviso that this could well be exactly 1, without this finding being anything to get excited about.
>
> Robert Newcombe.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A UK-based worldwide e-mail broadcast system mailing list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Bibby
> Sent: 24 July 2018 21:28
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: correlation coefficient
>
> Please look at the data, not the summary statistics. JOHN BIBBY
>
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 at 20:01, Martin Bland < [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> You are correct, the value of the correlation coefficient which would
>> be significant with 4 observations is 0.95.
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> On 24 July 2018 at 17:57, paaveen jeyaganth <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear allstat ,
>>> i have 4 data point i did a pearson correlation end up with r=
>>> 0.8919 p= 0.1081 why is that it's not significant since it's high
>>> correlation 0.89 because of sample size??
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Paaveen
>>>
>>> You may leave the list at any time by sending the command
>>>
>>> SIGNOFF allstat
>>>
>>> to [log in to unmask], leaving the subject line blank.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ***************************************************
>> J. Martin Bland
>> Prof. of Health Statistics Emeritus
>> Dept. of Health Sciences
>> Seebohm Rowntree Building
>> University of York
>> Heslington
>> York YO10 5DD
>>
>> Email: [log in to unmask]
>> Phone: 01904 321334 Fax: 01904 321382
>> Web site: http://martinbland.co.uk/
>>
>> Statement by the University of York:
>> This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
>> solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the
>> intended recipient of this email and its attachments, you must take no
>> action based upon them, nor must you copy or show them to anyone.
>> Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email
>> in error. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the
>> author and do not necessarily represent those of The University of York.
>> ***************************************************
>>
>> You may leave the list at any time by sending the command
>>
>> SIGNOFF allstat
>>
>> to [log in to unmask], leaving the subject line blank.
>>
> --
> ===== *Emails are generally written in a personal capacity, not for any particular organisation.* *York Bus Forum: * Please note the following meetings, *all **in West Offices at 5.15 for
> 5.30pm:*
> *17 July: *Monthly meeting
> *18 September: *Open Public Meeting to discuss *our discussion paper "Better than a Bus Station" which is here <http://www.yorkbusforum.org/busstationreport>*.
> *19 September: "Have your say with Julian Sturdy MP". *
>
> We generally meet on the third Tuesday of each month.
> Please get your friends to join - it's only £5! Details of how to join are here <https://www.yorkbusforum.org/join-us/>.
>
> You may leave the list at any time by sending the command
>
> SIGNOFF allstat
>
> to [log in to unmask], leaving the subject line blank.
>
> You may leave the list at any time by sending the command
>
> SIGNOFF allstat
>
> to [log in to unmask], leaving the subject line blank.
>
You may leave the list at any time by sending the command
SIGNOFF allstat
to [log in to unmask], leaving the subject line blank.
|