Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
    • About Us
    • Colophon
    • Survey
  • Reliability.fm
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • NoMTBF
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • ASQR&R
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • AI & Predictive Maintenance
      • Asset Management in the Mining Industry
      • CMMS and Maintenance Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • RCM Blitz®
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
      • The People Side of Maintenance
      • The Reliability Mindset
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Field Reliability Data Analysis
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability by Design
      • Reliability Competence
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
      • Reliability Knowledge
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Institute of Quality & Reliability
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • R for Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Statistical Methods for Failure-Time Data
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Glossary
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinar Sources
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • Your Courses
    • Live Courses
      • Introduction to Reliability Engineering & Accelerated Testings Course Landing Page
      • Advanced Accelerated Testing Course Landing Page
    • Integral Concepts Courses
      • Reliability Analysis Methods Course Landing Page
      • Applied Reliability Analysis Course Landing Page
      • Statistics, Hypothesis Testing, & Regression Modeling Course Landing Page
      • Measurement System Assessment Course Landing Page
      • SPC & Process Capability Course Landing Page
      • Design of Experiments Course Landing Page
    • The Manufacturing Academy Courses
      • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
      • Reliability Engineering Statistics
      • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
      • Quality Engineering Statistics
      • FMEA in Practice
      • Process Capability Analysis course
      • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
      • Return on Investment online course
    • Industrial Metallurgist Courses
    • FMEA courses Powered by The Luminous Group
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Reliability Engineering for Heavy Industry
    • How to be an Online Student
    • Quondam Courses
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home
  • Barringer Process Reliability Introduction Course Landing Page
  • Upcoming Live Events
You are here: Home / Articles / Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient

by Fred Schenkelberg Leave a Comment

Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient

Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient

This non-parametric analysis tool provides a way to compare two sets of ordinal data (data that can be rank ordered in a meaningful manner). The result, rs, is a measure of the association between two datasets.

You may want to know if two reviewers have similar ratings for movies, or if two assessment techniques provide similar results.

If rs is 1 it means when one series increases the other does also. If rs is -1, there is a negative relationship, meaning as one series increases the other decreases. At zero there is no relationship between the two series. The further from zero the more convincing the correlation between the two series.

This does not work for sets with a non-linear relationship, say a parabolic function for example.

Example Calculation

Let’s consider an example. Let’s ask two people to rate a set of four movies (of course using more items to rate would provide much more meaningful results – I’m keeping it short for the example only). We ask for a rating from one to ten.

An alternative experiment that could use this method, would be the comparison of the average rating from two groups of people when each group is presenting the information differently. Say group A first watches the movie trailer and group B only has the movie summary.

There are many ways we can collect data, as long as we can rank order the results with two sets of data, we can determine if there is a correlation.

Step 1: Collect the data

Back to the example, 5 movies rated by two people. The two columns, Data A and Data B, are the rating given by person A and B, respectively for four movies.

Data A Data B Rank A Rank B d d2
6 2
4 8
7 6
 2  4
5  3

Step 2: Rank the data

In columns Rank A and Rank B, enter the rank order value for Data A and Data B, respectively. For each data column, A & B, separately, rank order from lowest to highest with the lowest rank set to one and increment up to the number of values, in this case, 5.

Data A Data B Rank A Rank B d d2
6 2  4 1
4 8 2 5
7 6 5 4
2 4 1 3
5 3  3  2

In Data A the lowest value is a 2, thus the Rank is 1. Then looking for the next highest value in the Data A column, we find a 4, which is Ranked a 2, and so on.

If there is a tie, split the next two ranks. For example, if Data A’s column has two ratings of 4, we would Rank them both 2.5 (the average of the next two ranks, 2 and 3).

Step 3: Calculate the difference in ranks

In the D column, calculate the differences, recording the absolute value as the sign does not matter.

Data A Data B Rank A Rank B d d2
6 2  4  1  3
4 8  2 5  3
7 6  5 4  1
 2  4  1 3 2
5  3  3 2  1

The absolute value of Rank A – Rank B is D. 4 – 1 = 3.

Step 4: Square the differences

Just square the values in column D and enter in column D2

Data A Data B Rank A Rank B d d2
6 2  4  1  3 9
4 8  2 5  3  9
7 6  5 4  1  1
 2  4  1 3 2 4
5  3  3 2  1 1

Step 5: Sum column D2

This the value ∑D2
In this case it is 9 + 9 + 1 + 4 + 1 = 24.

Step 6: Calculate rs

If there were no ties in the data then use this formula.

$$ \large\displaystyle {{r}_{s}}=1-\left( \frac{6\sum{{{D}^{2}}}}{n\left( {{n}^{2}}-1 \right)} \right)$$

If there was one or more ties, then use this formula.

$$ \large\displaystyle {{r}_{s}}=\frac{\sum\nolimits_{i}{\left( {{x}_{i}}-\bar{x} \right)}\left( {{y}_{i}}-\bar{y} \right)}{\sqrt{{{\sum\nolimits_{i}{\left( {{x}_{i}}-\bar{x} \right)}}^{2}}{{\sum\nolimits_{i}{\left( {{y}_{i}}-\bar{y} \right)}}^{2}}}}$$

where the x and y’s are the original values (Data A and Data B).

Calculating the rs value for the example we find

$$ \large\displaystyle {{r}_{s}}=1-\left( \frac{6\sum{{{D}^{2}}}}{n\left( {{n}^{2}}-1 \right)} \right)=1-\left( \frac{6\times 24}{5\left( 25-1 \right)} \right)=-0.2$$

Step 7: Interpret the results

With a rs value of – 0.2, we may conclude that there is only a very slight, if any, negative correlation between the two reviewers.

The value of rs can vary between -1 and 1.

Close to -1 indicates a negative correlation.
Close to 0 indicates no linear correlation.
Close to 1 indicates a positive correlation.


Related:

Kendall Coefficient of Concordance (article)

Paired-Comparison Hypothesis Tests (article)

Contingency Coefficient (article)

 

Filed Under: Articles, CRE Preparation Notes, Probability and Statistics for Reliability Tagged With: Statistics non-parametric

About Fred Schenkelberg

I am the reliability expert at FMS Reliability, a reliability engineering and management consulting firm I founded in 2004. I left Hewlett Packard (HP)’s Reliability Team, where I helped create a culture of reliability across the corporation, to assist other organizations.

« Kendall Coefficient of Concordance
Murphy’s Law and Reliability »

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CRE Preparation Notes

Article by Fred Schenkelberg

Join Accendo

Join our members-only community for full access to exclusive eBooks, webinars, training, and more.

It’s free and only takes a minute.

Get Full Site Access

Not ready to join?
Stay current on new articles, podcasts, webinars, courses and more added to the Accendo Reliability website each week.
No membership required to subscribe.

[popup type="" link_text="Get Weekly Email Updates" link_class="button" ][display_form id=266][/popup]

  • CRE Preparation Notes
  • CRE Prep
  • Reliability Management
  • Probability and Statistics for Reliability
  • Reliability in Design and Development
  • Reliability Modeling and Predictions
  • Reliability Testing
  • Maintainability and Availability
  • Data Collection and Use

© 2025 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy