The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Analysis of Short Time Series: Correcting for Autocorrelation
Abstract
Short time series are common in environmental and ecological studies. For sample sizes of 10 to 50, I examined the performance of methods for adjusting confidence intervals of the mean and parameters of a linear regression for autocorrelation. Similar analyses are common in econometric studies, and serious concerns have been raised about the adequacy of the common adjustment approaches, especially for estimating the slope of a linear regression when the explanatory variable has a time trend. Use of a bias—corrected estimate of the autocorrelation, either in an adjusted t test or in two—stage approach, outperformed other methods, including maximum likelihood and bootstrap estimators, in terms of confidence interval coverage. The bias correction was, however, sometimes awkward to apply. It was generally better to test for autocorrelation at the 0.5 level and use ordinary least squares if the test was not significant, although this pretesting mainly helped for weak autocorrelation and small sample sizes. For the best methods, the coverage was sometimes still substantially less than the stated 95% when autocorrelation was strong, even for sample sizes as large as 50. This was true for estimates of the mean, the regression intercept, and, when the explanatory variable had a time trend, the slope. Simulation results and an example show that different adjustment methods can produce substantially different estimates and confidence intervals. Cautious interpretation of confidence intervals and hypothesis tests is recommended.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments
Hurlbert, S. H. (1984) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/1942661 · Cited by 8,377
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. (1986) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/ss/1177013815 · Cited by 6,033
Environmental Impact Assessment: "Pseudoreplication" in Time?
Stewart-Oaten, A., Murdoch, W. W., & Parker, K. R. (1986) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1939815 · Cited by 1,331
Cited by
Early-warning signals for critical transitions
Scheffer, M., Bascompte, J., Brock, W. A., Brovkin, V., Carpenter, S. R., Dakos, V., Held, H., van Nes, E. H., Rietkerk, M., & Sugihara, G. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08227 · Cited by 4,854
Comparison of methods to account for autocorrelation in correlation analyses of fish data
Pyper, B. J., & Peterman, R. M. (1998) · Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · doi:10.1139/cjfas-55-9-2127 · Cited by 835
META-ANALYSIS OF COD–SHRIMP INTERACTIONS REVEALS TOP-DOWN CONTROL IN OCEANIC FOOD WEBS
Worm, B., & Myers, R. A. (2003) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[0162:maocsi]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 482
Estimating local biodiversity change: a critique of papers claiming no net loss of local diversity
Gonzalez, A., Cardinale, B. J., Allington, G. R. H., Byrnes, J., Arthur Endsley, K., Brown, D. G., Hooper, D. U., Isbell, F., O'Connor, M. I., & Loreau, M. (2016) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/15-1759.1 · Cited by 354
Acoustic indices as proxies for biodiversity: a meta‐analysis
Alcocer, I., Lima, H., Sugai, L. S. M., & Llusia, D. (2022) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12890 · Cited by 273
“Similar to spatial data, time-series data commonly experience autocorrelation, although the degree of autocorrelation depends on the time interval between samples (Bence, 1995).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Bence, J. R.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-03
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 628-639
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2037004467
- Cited by
- 199
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 3.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Analysis of Short Time Series: Correcting for Autocorrelation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1941218
- The paper
- Bence, J. R. (1995). Analysis of Short Time Series: Correcting for Autocorrelation. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941218
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.