Date:         Wed, 12 May 2010 07:47:33 -0500
Reply-To:     ANDRES ALBERTO BURGA LEON <aburgal@minedu.gob.pe>
Sender:       "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         ANDRES ALBERTO BURGA LEON <aburgal@minedu.gob.pe>
Subject:      Re: Size or significance of correlations
Comments: To: Humphrey Paulie <humphreyyy1000@yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To:  <129416.95627.qm@web45113.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

Hello Humphrey:

In my opinion, we need to distinguish between statistical significance and 

practical significance.
The statistical significance only means that this correlation is expected 
to be different from 0 in the population. You should also look at the size 

of the correlation considering the field in which you are working. Is your 

correlation similar to that found in other studies using this variables? 
This correlation have any practical meaning? With a correaltion as low as 
0.15 the variance of one variable explains 2.25% of the variance from the 
other variable, wich is very low.
Kindly


Mg. Andrés Burga León
Coordinador de Análisis e Informática
Unidad de Medición de la Calidad Educativa
Ministerio de Educación del Perú
Calle El Comercio s/n (espalda del Museo de la Nación)
Lima 41
Perú
Teléfono 615-5840



Humphrey Paulie <humphreyyy1000@yahoo.com> 
Enviado por: "SPSSX(r) Discussion" <SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
12/05/2010 06:01 a.m.
Por favor, responda a
Humphrey Paulie <humphreyyy1000@yahoo.com>


Para
SPSSX-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
cc

Asunto
Size or significance of correlations








Dear all,
I have acorrealted a neumber of varibales (Pearson) and have found 
correlations as low as .15 to be significant at 0.01 level (two-tailed). 
My sample size is 280.
I dont know how to interpret this.
the coefficinets are very small however statistically significant.
Which one should I trust, the size of the coefficients or the statistical 
significnace?
I will be thankful for comments.
Cheers
Humphrey


[text/html]