4
$\begingroup$

What are the assumptions for the proper use and interpretation of the Pearson's correlation coefficient?

How is $\DeclareMathOperator{\cov}{cov}\cov(X,Y)$ affected by (mild) deviations of linearity?

How is $\cov(X,Y)$ influenced by the presence of heteroscedasticity?

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

9
$\begingroup$

The only real assumption of Pearson's correlation is that the variables are interval level. There are additional assumptions for tests of whether the correlation is 0, but the correlation is the correlation.

However, the correlation only examines the linear relationship between X and Y. So, while the correlation doesn't assume anything about the variables, it can be misleading in some cases and for some purposes. See the Anscombe Quartet for some extreme examples.

It is similar to the case with the mean: The arithmetic mean doesn't assume anything about the variables except, again, that they are interval. But the mean can be a misleading choice of measure for central location in some cases.

However, it is not necessarily the case that the mean or correlation are poor choices even with oddly distributed data: It depends on what you are trying to measure.

The central lesson is that it is always good to graph your data first. As Yogi Berra said "You can see a lot by looking"

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Could you please explain (or give a reference) why the variables need to be continuous in order for Pearson's correlation to make sense? Ditto for why the arithmetic mean makes sense only for continuous random variables? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 28, 2013 at 3:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hmmm. Thinking about it some more, they could be count variables as well; I edited my post $\endgroup$
    – Peter Flom
    Commented Jan 28, 2013 at 11:23
  • $\begingroup$ I've seen Pearson's correlation assumptions discussed and documented in many places. Many of those places say normal distributions of the variables is an assumption, but nowhere have I seen a reference. Here's one example of a paper with the normality assumption, but no reference: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3576830 So, do you have any references to back up your claims? $\endgroup$ Commented May 28, 2018 at 4:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.