Re: Minimum number of cases for a correlation?
- From: "Greg Heath" <heath@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 28 May 2006 03:11:47 -0700
John Uebersax wrote:
Is an N of 12 just too small for a correlation?
In answering this I think one also needs to take into consideration the
likely magnitude of the correlation coefficient. For example, if, in a
given set of data, N = 12 and r = 1.0, then the N is probably large
enough to show association.
One suggestion might be to construct, say, the 90% confidence interval
of the correlation coefficient. That will adequately convey the
uncertainty in estimation due to the small N.
How is this obtained when rho ~= 0?
I know that when rho = 0,
1. t = r*sqrt((n-2)/(1-r^2)) is t(n-2) for a binormal distribution in x
and y.
2. z = invtanh(r) --> N{0,1/(n-3)} as n --> inf.
Can these be generalized for rho ~= 0?
Hope this helps.
Greg
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Minimum number of cases for a correlation?
- From: Ray Koopman
- Re: Minimum number of cases for a correlation?
- References:
- Minimum number of cases for a correlation?
- From: Glucoboost
- Re: Minimum number of cases for a correlation?
- From: Anon.
- Re: Minimum number of cases for a correlation?
- From: John Uebersax
- Minimum number of cases for a correlation?
- Prev by Date: Re: Trend and Seasonality
- Next by Date: Re: Minimum number of cases for a correlation?
- Previous by thread: Re: Minimum number of cases for a correlation?
- Next by thread: Re: Minimum number of cases for a correlation?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|