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

Reply via email to