Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Microsoft Excel: Pearson's Correlation01:18

Microsoft Excel: Pearson's Correlation

Microsoft Excel is a powerful tool for statistical analysis, including calculating Pearson's correlation coefficient, which measures the strength and direction of a linear relationship between two continuous variables. Pearson's correlation coefficient, often denoted as "r," ranges from -1 to 1. A value close to 1 indicates a strong positive correlation, meaning as one variable increases, the other does too. A value close to -1 indicates a strong negative correlation, implying that as one...
Coefficient of Correlation01:12

Coefficient of Correlation

The correlation coefficient, r, developed by Karl Pearson in the early 1900s, is numerical and provides a measure of strength and direction of the linear association between the independent variable x and the dependent variable y.
If you suspect a linear relationship between x and y, then r can measure how strong the linear relationship is.
What the VALUE of r tells us:
The value of r is always between –1 and +1: –1 ≤ r ≤ 1.
The size of the correlation r indicates the strength of the linear...
Calibration Curves: Correlation Coefficient01:10

Calibration Curves: Correlation Coefficient

In a linear calibration curve, there is a value called the calibration coefficient, denoted by 'r,' which measures the strength and the direction of association between two variables. The correlation coefficient value ranges from −1 to +1. A value of +1 indicates a perfect positive linear correlation, −1 denotes a perfect negative correlation, and 0 implies no correlation between the two variables. A positive correlation value establishes that as one variable increases, the other increases, and...
Correlation and Regression00:53

Correlation and Regression

In statistics, correlation describes the degree of association between two variables. In the subfield of linear regression, correlation is mathematically expressed by the correlation coefficient, which describes the strength and direction of the relationship between two variables. The coefficient is symbolically represented by 'r' and ranges from -1 to +1. A positive value indicates a positive correlation where the two variables move in the same direction. A negative value suggests a negative...
Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance01:20

Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance

Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance (W), also known as Kendall's W, is a non-parametric statistical measure used to assess the agreement or concordance between multiple raters or judges when they rank a set of items. It is often used when you have ordinal data (ranks) and you want to see if there is consistency or consensus among the raters. It is widely applied in research areas such as psychology, medicine, and social sciences, where multiple judges are asked to rank or rate subjects or...
Correlations02:20

Correlations

Correlation means that there is a relationship between two or more variables (such as ice cream consumption and crime), but this relationship does not necessarily imply cause and effect. When two variables are correlated, it simply means that as one variable changes, so does the other. We can measure correlation by calculating a statistic known as a correlation coefficient. A correlation coefficient is a number from -1 to +1 that indicates the strength and direction of the relationship between...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Lipid packing contributes to the confinement of caveolae to the plasma membrane.

eLife·2026
Same author

Protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection is achieved when simvastatin is supplied before infection and causes membrane reorganisation.

Infectious diseases (London, England)·2026
Same author

The Safety and Effectiveness of Early Anti-Tumor-Necrosis-Factor Therapy for Penetrating Crohn's Disease Complications in Children.

The American journal of gastroenterology·2026
Same author

High Rates of Seroprotection for Measles in Pediatric Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

The American journal of gastroenterology·2026
Same author

Antibiotic Utilization for Perianal Fistulizing Complications among Young Patients with Crohn's Disease.

The Journal of pediatrics·2026
Same author

Effectiveness and safety of ustekinumab in pediatric Crohn's disease: Results of the REALITI study.

Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 10, 2026

Super-Resolution Imaging to Study Co-Localization of Proteins and Synaptic Markers in Primary Neurons
14:02

Super-Resolution Imaging to Study Co-Localization of Proteins and Synaptic Markers in Primary Neurons

Published on: October 31, 2020

Quantifying colocalization by correlation: the Pearson correlation coefficient is superior to the Mander's overlap

Jeremy Adler1, Ingela Parmryd

  • 1The Wenner-Gren Institute, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden.

Cytometry. Part a : the Journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology
|July 24, 2010
PubMed
Summary

The Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) is a reliable measure for fluorophore colocalization, unlike Mander's overlap coefficient (MOC). PCC accurately quantifies correlation, while MOC is problematic for colocalization analysis.

More Related Videos

Full- versus Sub-Regional Quantification of Amyloid-Beta Load on Mouse Brain Sections
07:28

Full- versus Sub-Regional Quantification of Amyloid-Beta Load on Mouse Brain Sections

Published on: May 19, 2022

Tracking Drug-induced Changes in Receptor Post-internalization Trafficking by Colocalizational Analysis
07:48

Tracking Drug-induced Changes in Receptor Post-internalization Trafficking by Colocalizational Analysis

Published on: July 3, 2015

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 10, 2026

Super-Resolution Imaging to Study Co-Localization of Proteins and Synaptic Markers in Primary Neurons
14:02

Super-Resolution Imaging to Study Co-Localization of Proteins and Synaptic Markers in Primary Neurons

Published on: October 31, 2020

Full- versus Sub-Regional Quantification of Amyloid-Beta Load on Mouse Brain Sections
07:28

Full- versus Sub-Regional Quantification of Amyloid-Beta Load on Mouse Brain Sections

Published on: May 19, 2022

Tracking Drug-induced Changes in Receptor Post-internalization Trafficking by Colocalizational Analysis
07:48

Tracking Drug-induced Changes in Receptor Post-internalization Trafficking by Colocalizational Analysis

Published on: July 3, 2015

Area of Science:

  • Microscopy and image analysis
  • Quantitative fluorescence imaging
  • Biophysical techniques

Background:

  • Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) and Mander's overlap coefficient (MOC) are common metrics for quantifying fluorophore colocalization.
  • MOC was developed to address perceived limitations of PCC in colocalization studies.
  • Both coefficients assess the spatial overlap of signals from different fluorescent labels.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the performance and suitability of PCC and MOC for colocalization analysis.
  • To evaluate the impact of data characteristics (e.g., offset, gain, background) on PCC and MOC measurements.
  • To determine if MOC is a valid alternative or substitute for PCC in colocalization studies.

Main Methods:

  • Mathematical comparison of PCC and MOC formulas.
  • Testing both coefficients on correlated datasets with varying parameters (offset, gain).
  • Analysis of MOC's response to different intensity levels and background noise.

Main Results:

  • MOC showed limited response to datasets that pushed PCC limits.
  • PCC is unaffected by offset changes, while MOC is sensitive to positive offsets.
  • MOC is a hybrid metric that favors high intensities, downplays low intensities, and ignores blank pixels, unlike PCC which solely measures correlation.

Conclusions:

  • MOC is a confusing metric that combines correlation with co-occurrence, making it unsuitable for accurate colocalization measurements.
  • PCC is a more reliable and interpretable measure for colocalization analysis compared to MOC.
  • Excluding background pixels is crucial for accurate correlation measurements in colocalization studies.