474 



Prof. K. Pearson. 



[June 4, 



The results are in far better accord than we might have anticipated, and 

 we see from these male data that — 



(i) Our environmental measure appears to be justified by its close correla- 

 tion (0'994) with the child death-rate. 



(ii) Notwithstanding this the infantile death-rate is fairly closely 

 correlated with the environmental measure in the negative sense. 



(iii) The infantile and child death-rates, correcting for the environmental 

 factor, are very substantially negatively correlated. 



We may now turn to the female data — 



Table II. — Females. 



1838—1854 .. 

 1871—1880 .. 

 1881—1890 .. 

 1891—1900 .. 



Means 



132 -60 

 124 -70 

 98 -55 



50 -00 

 52 -56 

 54 -35 

 55-18 



From these data we further deduce 



r ic = -0-5080 

 r ie = +0-3042 

 r ce = -0-9507 



The partial correlation coefficient between infantile and child death- 

 rates is 



e r ic = -0-7399 ±0-1459. 

 This is again substantial and significant. It means again that by fixing 

 the environment as far as lies in our power, we have increased the negative 

 correlation between infantile and child death-rates. 

 The multiple regression formula is now 



c = lll-42-0-9514(i-133-81)-7-8335(e-53-02) 

 = 654-06-0-9514 ^-7-8335 e. (2) 

 Clearly for a constant environment — 



Increase in child death-rate = — - 9514 (increase in infantile death-rate). 

 Or, in other words — 



Percentage decrease in child death-rate = 1-1424 (increase in infantile 

 death-rate). 



