What is the correct term to be used in the title phrase? Wikipedia says:
$\dots$ The coefficient of determination $R^2$ is a measure of the global fit of the model. Specifically, $R^2$ is an element of $[0, 1]$ and represents the proportion of variability in $Y_i$ that may be attributed to some linear combination of the regressors (explanatory variables) in X.
$R^2$ is often interpreted as the proportion of response variation "explained" by the regressors in the model. Thus, $R^2 = 1$ indicates that the fitted model explains all variability in y, while $R^2 = 0$ indicates no 'linear' relationship (for straight line regression, this means that the straight line model is a constant line (slope = 0, intercept = $\bar{y}$) between the response variable and regressors). An interior value such as $R^2 = 0.7$ may be interpreted as follows: "Seventy percent of the variance in the response variable can be explained by the explanatory variables. The remaining thirty percent can be attributed to unknown, lurking variables or inherent variability."
Are any of variability, variance, or variation malapropisms? Which is standard terminology?