Skip to main content
Fisher not Fischer
Source Link
Nick Cox
  • 59.5k
  • 8
  • 136
  • 212

For Pearson correlation coefficients, it is generally appropriate to transform the r values using a FischerFisher z transformation. Then average the z-values and convert the average back to an r value.

I imagine it would be fine for a Spearman coefficient as well.

Here's a paper and the wikipedia entry.

For Pearson correlation coefficients, it is generally appropriate to transform the r values using a Fischer z transformation. Then average the z-values and convert the average back to an r value.

I imagine it would be fine for a Spearman coefficient as well.

Here's a paper and the wikipedia entry.

For Pearson correlation coefficients, it is generally appropriate to transform the r values using a Fisher z transformation. Then average the z-values and convert the average back to an r value.

I imagine it would be fine for a Spearman coefficient as well.

Here's a paper and the wikipedia entry.

Post Merged (destination) from stats.stackexchange.com/questions/17129/…
Source Link
Amyunimus
  • 775
  • 1
  • 11
  • 18

For Pearson correlation coefficients, it is generally appropriate to transform the r values using a Fischer z transformation. Then average the z-values and convert the average back to an r value.

I imagine it would be fine for a Spearman coefficient as well.

Here's a paper and the wikipedia entry.