+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: p vs. r

  1. #1
    Points: 4, Level: 1
    Level completed: 7%, Points required for next Level: 46

    Posts
    1
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    p vs. r




    Sorry if this is a naive question, but its all a crash course for me...
    I am running a bivariate correlation in SPSS on some data. The Pearson correlation comes out low (<.1) but p = 0.00. From what I know of r, less than .3 basically means no correlation, but a p < 0.05 means there is a relationship.
    Where am I off?
    Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    Omega Contributor
    Points: 38,253, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    hlsmith's Avatar
    Location
    Not Ames, IA
    Posts
    6,989
    Thanks
    397
    Thanked 1,185 Times in 1,146 Posts

    Re: p vs. r

    Your comments are generally correct. There is a discernible correlation, though you need to remember the pvalue does not tell you the size or direction of the correlation. Also with a large enough sample, small correlations can have small pvalues because sample sizes are usually in the denominator of the test statistic calculation.
    Stop cowardice, ban guns!

  3. #3
    Super Moderator
    Points: 13,151, Level: 74
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 99
    Dragan's Avatar
    Location
    Illinois, US
    Posts
    2,014
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 223 Times in 192 Posts

    Re: p vs. r


    Quote Originally Posted by leejones15 View Post
    Sorry if this is a naive question, but its all a crash course for me...
    I am running a bivariate correlation in SPSS on some data. The Pearson correlation comes out low (<.1) but p = 0.00. From what I know of r, less than .3 basically means no correlation, but a p < 0.05 means there is a relationship.
    Where am I off?
    Thanks in advance.
    It's simply a matter of practical significance verses statistical significance: For example see Roger Kirk's (widely cited) article published in Psychological Methods (1996): http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/...64496056005002

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Dragan For This Useful Post:

    bugman (04-08-2017)

+ Reply to Thread

           




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts






Advertise on Talk Stats