In: Math
Suppose you have a theory that your organization's back safety training program is not producing notable results in reducing back injuries. Your theory is that performing more back safety training is not corresponding to reduction in back injuries. You calculate the correlation coefficient comparing the number of back safety training sessions over the course of three years with the number of back injuries. Your calculation yields the following number: 0.2. How would you, in statistical terms, describe the correlation number and what would you conclude regarding theory?
A. |
Weak positive correlation. The appears to be little to no statistical correlation to support the efficacy of the back safety training. |
|
B. |
Strong positive correlation. The appears to be strong statistical correlation to support the efficacy of the back safety training. |
|
C. |
Weak negative correlation. The appears to be no statistical correlation to support the efficacy of the back safety training. |
|
D. |
Weak positive correlation. The appears to be strong statistical correlation to support the efficacy of the back safety training. |
Suppose you have a theory that your organization's back safety training program is not producing notable results in reducing back injuries. Your theory is that performing more back safety training is not corresponding to reduction in back injuries. You calculate the correlation coefficient comparing the number of back safety training sessions over the course of three years with the number of back injuries. Your calculation yields the following number: 0.2. How would you, in statistical terms, describe the correlation number and what would you conclude regarding theory?
Answer: A. |
Weak positive correlation. The appears to be little to no statistical correlation to support the efficacy of the back safety training. |
|
B. |
Strong positive correlation. The appears to be strong statistical correlation to support the efficacy of the back safety training. |
|
C. |
Weak negative correlation. The appears to be no statistical correlation to support the efficacy of the back safety training. |
|
D. |
Weak positive correlation. The appears to be strong statistical correlation to support the efficacy of the back safety training. |
Correlation of 0.2 is positive and weak correlation.
Rule of Thumb for Interpreting the Size of a Correlation Coefficient4
Size of Correlation |
Interpretation |
---|---|
.90 to 1.00 (−.90 to −1.00) |
Very high positive (negative) correlation |
.70 to .90 (−.70 to −.90) |
High positive (negative) correlation |
.50 to .70 (−.50 to −.70) |
Moderate positive (negative) correlation |
.30 to .50 (−.30 to −.50) |
Low positive (negative) correlation |
.00 to .30 (.00 to −.30) |
negligible correlation |