2012
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2012.02707.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Less than eight (and a half) misconceptions of spatial analysis

Abstract: Less than eight (and a half) misconceptions of spatial analysis A B S T R A C T Spatial analyses are indispensable analytical tools in biogeography and macroecology. In a recent Guest Editorial, Hawkins (Journal of Biogeography, 2012, 39, 1-9) raised several issues related to spatial analyses. While we concur with some points, we here clarify those confounding (1) spatial trends and spatial autocorrelation, and (2) spatial autocorrelation in the response variable and in the residuals. We argue that recognizing… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
61
2
2

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(68 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
2
61
2
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The correction for autocorrelation and for that matter, the use of regression models in spatial analyses of species richness is somewhat controversial [104], [105]. Moran’s I test shows significant effects of autocorrelation in our data (Table 3) similar to what was observed by Bellwood et al (2005) [53] and Tittensor et al (2010) [57].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…The correction for autocorrelation and for that matter, the use of regression models in spatial analyses of species richness is somewhat controversial [104], [105]. Moran’s I test shows significant effects of autocorrelation in our data (Table 3) similar to what was observed by Bellwood et al (2005) [53] and Tittensor et al (2010) [57].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Although spatial autocorrelation in residuals may cause problems in interpreting the results, it is a genuine phenomenon in biogeographical and macroecological studies. Kühn and Dormann (2012) summarized this phenomenon as follows: ''If the spatial autocorrelation of an ecological response variable is caused by autocorrelated predictor variables (such as climate, land use, topography, human population densities or virtually any other spatial predictor), we are not alarmed. Of course we do not wish to remove this effect of such predictors.''…”
Section: Statistical Methods For Modelling Diversity Across the Provimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…I used the Spatial Eigenvector Mapping (SEVM) routine in SAM 4.0 (Rangel et al, 2010) to model the spatial autocorrelation that remained in the residuals after the single or multivariate environmental models were fit to the data (Diniz-Filho and Bini, 2005; Kühn and Dormann 2012); SEVM resulted in significant spatial predictors (i.e., Spatial Filters: SFs) that were combined with environmental variables in fully spatial explicit models, while avoiding the introduction of multicollinearity in the data (Kühn and Dormann, 2012). The variance inflation factor (VIF) was used as a measure of the degree of multicollinearity present in the data (VIF < 10, see Chatterjee and Hadi, 2006;Dormann et al, 2013).…”
Section: Analyses Of Datamentioning
confidence: 99%