Hi, It's pretty much impossible, since we don't know what GIS software you used, what commands, what R package and code, or what your data look like.
As a starting point, I'd suggest carefully rereading the help files for both the GIS and the R functions, to make sure that they are doing the same thing, and what you expect them to, and to review your data in both places to ensure that it is the same values and projection, etc. It is entirely possible that one software is scaling your data for you automatically, or some other processing step that is not duplicated by the other software. If trying those things doesn't clarify it for you, then please post back to the list with more information about the software and data you're using. Sarah On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 1:18 AM, Yalemzewod Gelaw <yalass...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > I tried to compute the Moran's I statistics using GIS and R. However, I got > different values. > > Could you please brief me how the difference can occurs? > > Using GIS > > Global Moran's I Summary > > Moran's Index: 0.151485 > > Expected Index: -0.007692 > > Variance: 0.001040 > > z-score: 4.935027 > > p-value: 0.000001 > > > > Using R > > Moran I test under randomisation > > data: Dat$allprop > > weights: Xlist > > Moran I statistic standard deviate = 0.82453, p-value = 0.4096 > > alternative hypothesis: two.sided > > sample estimates: > > Moran I statistic Expectation Variance > > 0.034154753 -0.007299270 0.002527644 > > NB: in the neighbour links there are 2 regions with no links > > > Thank you for any help > > > > *Regards, * > > Yalem -- Sarah Goslee http://www.functionaldiversity.org _______________________________________________ R-sig-Geo mailing list R-sig-Geo@r-project.org https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo