Skip to content
Prev 17699 / 398502 Next

linear correlation?

Uh???

A good deal of this thread leaves me perplexed.  

Of course you can correlate vectors of differing units.  Correlations
are covariances expressed in a standardized unit.  I.e. differing units
is the reason for correlation coefficients in the first place.

Of course you can correlate measures of different phenomenon - i.e.
economic growth is correlated with percentage of voters voting for the
incumbent in the next election.  Correlation of two different measures
of the same phenomenon is called a test of reliability. 

Of course you can correlate cm and kg.  I would be perfectly confortable
stating that an person's weight in kg is correlated to their height in
cm.  Anyone disagree?

Obviously one has to be careful in extracting substantive meaning from
correlations - just like every statistic that I can think of.

In term of the big number small number thing.  The major source of your
observed correlations is coming from their being a set of small numbers
and a set of big numbers.  Think of these things as points on a graph.
In your example,
The minor fluctions in these series between observations 1, 2,3  and
4,5,6 is totally dwarfed by the difference between 3-4  It is this jump
between (3,3.3) and (100,108) which drives your correlations. 
Comparatively, the other changes are a wash.


============
Michaell Taylor
Senior Economist, Reis, New York, USA
Associate Professor, NTNU, Norway
Adjunct Professor, UD, South Africa
On Thu, 2002-03-07 at 10:16, Setzer.Woodrow at epamail.epa.gov wrote:
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._