Another approach that may be less exact than Fisher's tranformation, but I think could be more intuitive (and could give ideas about practical significance in addition to statistical significance) is the visual test:
Buja, A., Cook, D. Hofmann, H., Lawrence, M. Lee, E.-K., Swayne,
D.F and Wickham, H. (2009) Statistical Inference for exploratory
data analysis and model diagnostics Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 2009
367, 4361-4383 doi: 10.1098/rsta.2009.0120
There is an implementation of this in the vis.test function in the TeachingDemos package for R. One possibly way to run it for your example is:
vt.scattercor <- function(x,y,r,...,orig=TRUE)
{
require('MASS')
par(mar=c(2.5,2.5,1,1)+0.1)
if(orig) {
plot(x,y, xlab="", ylab="", ...)
} else {
mu <- c(mean(x), mean(y))
var <- var( cbind(x,y) )
var[ rbind( 1:2, 2:1 ) ] <- r * sqrt(var[1,1]*var[2,2])
tmp <- mvrnorm( length(x), mu, var )
plot( tmp[,1], tmp[,2], xlab="", ylab="", ...)
}
}
test1 <- mvrnorm(100, c(0,0), rbind( c(1,.75), c(.75,1) ) )
test2 <- mvrnorm(100, c(0,0), rbind( c(1,.5), c(.5,1) ) )
vis.test( test1[,1], test1[,2], r=0.75, FUN=vt.scattercor )
vis.test( test2[,1], test2[,2], r=0.75, FUN=vt.scattercor )
Of course if your real data is not normal or the relationship is not linear then that will be easily picked up with the above code. If you want to simultaniously test for those, then the above code would do that, or the above code could be adapted to better represent the nature of the data.