IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jstats/v3y2020i3p14-184d378101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Family of Correlated Observations: From Independent to Strongly Interrelated Ones

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel A. Griffith

    (School of Economic, Political and Policy Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX 75080, USA)

Abstract

This paper proposes a new classification of correlated data types based upon the relative number of direct connections among observations, producing a family of correlated observations embracing seven categories, one whose empirical counterpart currently is unknown, and ranging from independent (i.e., no links) to approaching near-complete linkage (i.e., n(n − 1)/2 links). Analysis of specimen datasets from publicly available data sources furnishes empirical illustrations for these various categories. Their descriptions also include their historical context and calculation of their effective sample sizes (i.e., an equivalent number of independent observations). Concluding comments contain some state-of-the-art future research topics.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel A. Griffith, 2020. "A Family of Correlated Observations: From Independent to Strongly Interrelated Ones," Stats, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-19, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jstats:v:3:y:2020:i:3:p:14-184:d:378101
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2571-905X/3/3/14/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2571-905X/3/3/14/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blakeley B. McShane & David Gal & Andrew Gelman & Christian Robert & Jennifer L. Tackett, 2019. "Abandon Statistical Significance," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(S1), pages 235-245, March.
    2. Daniel A. Griffith, 2019. "Negative Spatial Autocorrelation: One of the Most Neglected Concepts in Spatial Statistics," Stats, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-28, August.
    3. Hodges, James S. & Reich, Brian J., 2010. "Adding Spatially-Correlated Errors Can Mess Up the Fixed Effect You Love," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 64(4), pages 325-334.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniel A. Griffith & Yongwan Chun & Monghyeon Lee, 2020. "Deeper Spatial Statistical Insights into Small Geographic Area Data Uncertainty," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Daniel A. Griffith, 2023. "Understanding Spatial Autocorrelation: An Everyday Metaphor and Additional New Interpretations," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Daniel A. Griffith, 2021. "Articulating Spatial Statistics and Spatial Optimization Relationships: Expanding the Relevance of Statistics," Stats, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-18, October.
    4. Daniel A. Griffith & Richard E. Plant, 2022. "Statistical Analysis in the Presence of Spatial Autocorrelation: Selected Sampling Strategy Effects," Stats, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Daniel A. Griffith, 2022. "Selected Payback Statistical Contributions to Matrix/Linear Algebra: Some Counterflowing Conceptualizations," Stats, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-16, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wilson J. Wright & Peter N. Neitlich & Alyssa E. Shiel & Mevin B. Hooten, 2022. "Mechanistic spatial models for heavy metal pollution," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(8), December.
    2. Zachary Van Winkle & Anette Fasang, 2021. "The complexity of employment and family life courses across 20th century Europe: More evidence for larger cross-national differences but little change across 1916‒1966 birth cohorts," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 44(32), pages 775-810.
    3. Brian J. Reich & Shu Yang & Yawen Guan & Andrew B. Giffin & Matthew J. Miller & Ana Rappold, 2021. "A Review of Spatial Causal Inference Methods for Environmental and Epidemiological Applications," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 89(3), pages 605-634, December.
    4. Ephraim M. Hanks, 2017. "Modeling Spatial Covariance Using the Limiting Distribution of Spatio-Temporal Random Walks," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(518), pages 497-507, April.
    5. Douglas R. M. Azevedo & Marcos O. Prates & Dipankar Bandyopadhyay, 2021. "MSPOCK: Alleviating Spatial Confounding in Multivariate Disease Mapping Models," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 26(3), pages 464-491, September.
    6. Ying C. MacNab, 2018. "Some recent work on multivariate Gaussian Markov random fields," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 27(3), pages 497-541, September.
    7. Daniel A. Griffith & Yongwan Chun, 2022. "Some useful details about the Moran coefficient, the Geary ratio, and the join count indices of spatial autocorrelation," Journal of Spatial Econometrics, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-30, December.
    8. Zhao, Qing & Boomer, G. Scott & Silverman, Emily & Fleming, Kathy, 2017. "Accounting for the temporal variation of spatial effect improves inference and projection of population dynamics models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 360(C), pages 252-259.
    9. Fanelli, Daniele, 2020. "Metascientific reproducibility patterns revealed by informatic measure of knowledge," MetaArXiv 5vnhj, Center for Open Science.
    10. Adam A. Szpiro & Lianne Sheppard & Sara D. Adar & Joel D. Kaufman, 2014. "Estimating acute air pollution health effects from cohort study data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 164-174, March.
    11. Diana W. Thomas & Michael D. Thomas, 2020. "Behavioral symmetry, rent seeking, and the Republic of Science," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 443-459, June.
    12. Emiko Dupont & Simon N. Wood & Nicole H. Augustin, 2022. "Spatial+: A novel approach to spatial confounding," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1279-1290, December.
    13. Isa Marques & Thomas Kneib & Nadja Klein, 2022. "Mitigating spatial confounding by explicitly correlating Gaussian random fields," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(5), August.
    14. Oshan, Taylor M., 2020. "The spatial structure debate in spatial interaction modeling: 50 years on," OSF Preprints 42vxn, Center for Open Science.
    15. Daisuke Murakami & Daniel Griffith, 2015. "Random effects specifications in eigenvector spatial filtering: a simulation study," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 311-331, October.
    16. Bertoni, M.; & Marin-Lopez, B.A.; & Sanz-de-Galdeano, A.;, 2023. "Subjective Gender-Based Patterns in ADHD Diagnosis," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 23/17, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    17. Markku Maula & Wouter Stam, 2020. "Enhancing Rigor in Quantitative Entrepreneurship Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(6), pages 1059-1090, November.
    18. Emiko Dupont & Simon N. Wood & Nicole H. Augustin, 2022. "Rejoinder to the discussions of “Spatial+: A novel approach to spatial confounding”," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1309-1312, December.
    19. Jennifer F. Bobb & Maricela F. Cruz & Stephen J. Mooney & Adam Drewnowski & David Arterburn & Andrea J. Cook, 2022. "Accounting for spatial confounding in epidemiological studies with individual‐level exposures: An exposure‐penalized spline approach," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(3), pages 1271-1293, July.
    20. David J. Hand, 2022. "Trustworthiness of statistical inference," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(1), pages 329-347, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jstats:v:3:y:2020:i:3:p:14-184:d:378101. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.