14-May-2008, 06:45 PM
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Bowie, MD
Posts: 1,834
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike alexander
Why, yes! And I should make a correction: I was using Maxwell - House - Cofi statistics (good to the last dropped decimal).
I was somewhat surprised to find that r = 0.3 is considered significant, and r = 0.5 highly significant, in these areas. OK, I was stunned you can get away with that.
|
My econ 101 prof (apparently in a own-subject-deprecating moment) said that the the difference between a hard science and a soft science is a hard science requires a correlation coefficient of .9 or .99, or even better sometimes, but a soft science only requires a correlation coefficient of .3.
__________________
-----
Todd (Bowie, MD, US, North America, Earth, Sol System, Vega region, Local Bubble, Orion arm, Milky Way Galaxy, Local Group, Virgo A Cluster, Virgo supercluster, the universe in which spock is clean shaven)
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
personal page: http://blog.astrosketches.info
|