Beyond Pearson's Correlation: Modern Nonparametric Independence Tests for Psychological Research.

IF 5.3 3区 心理学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Multivariate Behavioral Research Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-04 DOI:10.1080/00273171.2024.2347960
Julian D Karch, Andres F Perez-Alonso, Wicher P Bergsma
{"title":"Beyond Pearson's Correlation: Modern Nonparametric Independence Tests for Psychological Research.","authors":"Julian D Karch, Andres F Perez-Alonso, Wicher P Bergsma","doi":"10.1080/00273171.2024.2347960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When examining whether two continuous variables are associated, tests based on Pearson's, Kendall's, and Spearman's correlation coefficients are typically used. This paper explores modern nonparametric independence tests as an alternative, which, unlike traditional tests, have the ability to potentially detect any type of relationship. In addition to existing modern nonparametric independence tests, we developed and considered two novel variants of existing tests, most notably the Heller-Heller-Gorfine-Pearson (HHG-Pearson) test. We conducted a simulation study to compare traditional independence tests, such as Pearson's correlation, and the modern nonparametric independence tests in situations commonly encountered in psychological research. As expected, no test had the highest power across all relationships. However, the distance correlation and the HHG-Pearson tests were found to have substantially greater power than all traditional tests for many relationships and only slightly less power in the worst case. A similar pattern was found in favor of the HHG-Pearson test compared to the distance correlation test. However, given that distance correlation performed better for linear relationships and is more widely accepted, we suggest considering its use in place or additional to traditional methods when there is no prior knowledge of the relationship type, as is often the case in psychological research.</p>","PeriodicalId":53155,"journal":{"name":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","volume":" ","pages":"957-977"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multivariate Behavioral Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2024.2347960","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When examining whether two continuous variables are associated, tests based on Pearson's, Kendall's, and Spearman's correlation coefficients are typically used. This paper explores modern nonparametric independence tests as an alternative, which, unlike traditional tests, have the ability to potentially detect any type of relationship. In addition to existing modern nonparametric independence tests, we developed and considered two novel variants of existing tests, most notably the Heller-Heller-Gorfine-Pearson (HHG-Pearson) test. We conducted a simulation study to compare traditional independence tests, such as Pearson's correlation, and the modern nonparametric independence tests in situations commonly encountered in psychological research. As expected, no test had the highest power across all relationships. However, the distance correlation and the HHG-Pearson tests were found to have substantially greater power than all traditional tests for many relationships and only slightly less power in the worst case. A similar pattern was found in favor of the HHG-Pearson test compared to the distance correlation test. However, given that distance correlation performed better for linear relationships and is more widely accepted, we suggest considering its use in place or additional to traditional methods when there is no prior knowledge of the relationship type, as is often the case in psychological research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超越皮尔逊相关性:心理学研究中的现代非参数独立性检验》(Modern Nonparametric Independence Tests for Psychological Research)。
在检验两个连续变量是否相关时,通常使用基于皮尔逊、肯德尔和斯皮尔曼相关系数的检验。本文探讨了作为替代方法的现代非参数独立性检验,它与传统检验不同,能够潜在地检测出任何类型的关系。除了现有的现代非参数独立性检验,我们还开发并考虑了现有检验的两个新变体,其中最著名的是 Heller-Heller-Gorfine-Pearson 检验(HHG-Pearson)。我们进行了一项模拟研究,在心理学研究中常见的情况下比较传统的独立性检验(如皮尔逊相关性)和现代的非参数独立性检验。不出所料,在所有关系中,没有哪种检验的效力最高。然而,在许多关系中,距离相关检验和 HHG-Pearson 检验的效力大大高于所有传统检验,而在最坏的情况下,其效力仅略低于传统检验。与距离相关检验相比,HHG-Pearson 检验也有类似的优势。不过,鉴于距离相关检验在线性关系中的表现更好,而且被更广泛地接受,我们建议在没有关于关系类型的先验知识的情况下(如心理学研究中常见的情况),考虑使用距离相关检验来替代或补充传统方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Multivariate Behavioral Research 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.60%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Multivariate Behavioral Research (MBR) publishes a variety of substantive, methodological, and theoretical articles in all areas of the social and behavioral sciences. Most MBR articles fall into one of two categories. Substantive articles report on applications of sophisticated multivariate research methods to study topics of substantive interest in personality, health, intelligence, industrial/organizational, and other behavioral science areas. Methodological articles present and/or evaluate new developments in multivariate methods, or address methodological issues in current research. We also encourage submission of integrative articles related to pedagogy involving multivariate research methods, and to historical treatments of interest and relevance to multivariate research methods.
期刊最新文献
Latently Mediating: A Bayesian Take on Causal Mediation Analysis with Structured Survey Data. Quantifying Evidence for-and against-Granger Causality with Bayes Factors. Person Specific Parameter Heterogeneity in the 2PL IRT Model. Environment-by-PGS Interaction in the Classical Twin Design: An Application to Childhood Anxiety and Negative Affect. Homogeneity Assumptions in the Analysis of Dynamic Processes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1