<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Local Moran's I vs. Gi* in Spatial Statistics Questions</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/spatial-statistics-questions/local-moran-s-i-vs-gi/m-p/131683#M449</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Hi Phil, &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I answered some of this question here: &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;A href="http://forums.arcgis.com/threads/31142-Differences-between-Local-Spatial-Statistics-Results"&gt; http://forums.arcgis.com/threads/31142-Differences-between-Local-Spatial-Statistics-Results&lt;/A&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;The other part of your question is if these different analyzes should be used separately.&amp;nbsp; My answer would be that they are getting at slightly different questions, so it may be useful to use them both.&amp;nbsp; There is no reason that they cannot both be used in the same analysis since they both provide complementary insight into the questions that you're asking.&amp;nbsp; Alternatively, you can just use the one that proves your point or provides evidence for your hypothesis...but trying them both can't hurt.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Hope this helps.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Lauren Rosenshein&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Geoprocessing Product Engineer&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:14:15 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>LaurenRosenshein</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2011-06-14T18:14:15Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Local Moran's I vs. Gi*</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/spatial-statistics-questions/local-moran-s-i-vs-gi/m-p/131682#M448</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Hi folks,&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I am conducting a hot spot analysis and am trying to figure out if Local Moran's I and Gi* can be used in the same analysis?&amp;nbsp; Both statistics indicate spatial association of neighbors.&amp;nbsp; In particular, I am stuck on whether the COType produced from the Cluster/Outlier tool (high values surrounded by other high values) are similar to the results of the HotSpot Analysis tool where a statistically significant positive Z-Score indicates spatial clustering of high values.&amp;nbsp; My analysis using these two statistics comes up with slightly different results.&amp;nbsp; Should these statistics be used separately?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Thanks!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;-Phil&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 00:53:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/spatial-statistics-questions/local-moran-s-i-vs-gi/m-p/131682#M448</guid>
      <dc:creator>PhilipGibbons</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-06-07T00:53:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Local Moran's I vs. Gi*</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/spatial-statistics-questions/local-moran-s-i-vs-gi/m-p/131683#M449</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Hi Phil, &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I answered some of this question here: &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;A href="http://forums.arcgis.com/threads/31142-Differences-between-Local-Spatial-Statistics-Results"&gt; http://forums.arcgis.com/threads/31142-Differences-between-Local-Spatial-Statistics-Results&lt;/A&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;The other part of your question is if these different analyzes should be used separately.&amp;nbsp; My answer would be that they are getting at slightly different questions, so it may be useful to use them both.&amp;nbsp; There is no reason that they cannot both be used in the same analysis since they both provide complementary insight into the questions that you're asking.&amp;nbsp; Alternatively, you can just use the one that proves your point or provides evidence for your hypothesis...but trying them both can't hurt.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Hope this helps.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Lauren Rosenshein&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Geoprocessing Product Engineer&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:14:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/spatial-statistics-questions/local-moran-s-i-vs-gi/m-p/131683#M449</guid>
      <dc:creator>LaurenRosenshein</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2011-06-14T18:14:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

