A The expectation of the sampling distribution of Pearson's correlation

AI Thread Summary
The expectation of the sampling distribution of the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient is not always equal to the population correlation coefficient, particularly when sample sizes are small. The shape of this distribution is influenced by the sample size and the joint distribution of the variables involved. For very small samples, such as those with only two data points, the correlation may not accurately reflect the population correlation. This highlights the importance of considering both sample size and distribution characteristics when interpreting correlation coefficients. Overall, the relationship between sample size and the accuracy of the correlation estimate is crucial in statistical analysis.
Ad VanderVen
Messages
169
Reaction score
13
TL;DR Summary
The shape of the sampling distribution of the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient depends on the size of the sample. Is the expectation of the sampling distribution of the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient always equal to the population correlation coefficient, regardless of the sample size?
The shape of the sampling distribution of the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient depends on the size of the sample. Is the expectation of the sampling distribution of the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient always equal to the population correlation coefficient, regardless of the sample size?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ad VanderVen said:


The shape of the sampling distribution of the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient depends on the size of the sample.

Doesn't it also depend on the joint distribution of the variables involved?

Ad VanderVen said:
Is the expectation of the sampling distribution of the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient always equal to the population correlation coefficient, regardless of the sample size?

No, not according to the first paragraphs of https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2403&context=jmasm. However, I haven't read the entire article.
 
Consider the case of a sample of 2 data points.
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...
I was reading a Bachelor thesis on Peano Arithmetic (PA). PA has the following axioms (not including the induction schema): $$\begin{align} & (A1) ~~~~ \forall x \neg (x + 1 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A2) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + 1 =y + 1 \to x = y) \nonumber \\ & (A3) ~~~~ \forall x (x + 0 = x) \nonumber \\ & (A4) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + (y +1) = (x + y ) + 1) \nonumber \\ & (A5) ~~~~ \forall x (x \cdot 0 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A6) ~~~~ \forall xy (x \cdot (y + 1) = (x \cdot y) + x) \nonumber...
Back
Top