Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeColinearity
Posted by jebyrnes on 21 Jun 2007 at 21:16 GMT
Time-dependent variation in resighting rates was better explained by local rainfall (45.1% variance explained) than by the NAO (33.5% variance explained, Figure 1a).
http://plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0000539#article1.body1.sec2.p1
I'm curious, are these two variables colinear? Would a model that incorporated this actually provide better explanatory power (i.e., a structural equation modelling approach where you had NAO->Rainfall->Resighting Rate).
RE: Colinearity
jordif replied to jebyrnes on 23 Jun 2007 at 10:45 GMT
This is a very interesting question I will try to solve with SEM. However, what I can say at this moment is that although NAO is negatively related to rain in Spain and in western Mediterranean in general, the correlation between NAO and local rainfall is not very high (R2=0.07, N=26 years, p=0.17)