4 ms·
> Highly correlated" would not be the choice of words I use to describe correlations between (0.23 - 0.5). lol, this range is 0.5 to 0.7 variance explained (R
by political12345 4y ago
> Highly correlated" would not be the choice of words I use to describe correlations between (0.23 - 0.5).
lol, this range is 0.5 to 0.7 variance explained (R squared) which is an insane value. in typical social studies a correlation of > 5% is considered a major improvement.
In finance a correlation or > 1% is considered amazing.
You are either a hyper-intelectual drinking Taleb's kool-aid or simply don't know what you are talking about :D
- disgruntledphd2 4y agoIf the correlation is 0.2 then it explains 4% of the variance. If it's 0.5, then 25%. I'm not sure how you got your numbers, can you clarify? Also 10% variance explained in social science is considered pretty good (which is depressing, but such is life).
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hirvi74 4y ago> a hyper-intelectual Very far from it. I'm just an idiot with Internet access. > drinking Taleb's kool-aid I do agree with some of what he has said about IQ, but I am not well-versed in any of his other writings. > simply don't know what you are talking about Perhaps, but I am still not convinced.