Construct · 4 fields · 5 citations

Where does regression collide?

One name. Different field. Different construct. One map.

● jingle · one word, four constructs Nearest construct by meaningregression to the meancompare the meanings
How to read this

Every construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to regression is regression to the mean.

Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.

regression4 CONSTRUCTSRegression analysisDRAPER · MODEL Y ON XRegression to meanGALTON · EXTREMES EBBPsychoanalyticFREUD · EARLIER STAGESoftware regressionYOO · OLD BUG RETURNS

Spokes are fields; dashed arcs are shared lineage. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.

2026

Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each field appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.

Statistics (method)

Modelling an outcome on predictors

Fitting an equation that describes how an outcome depends on one or more predictors, so the fit can summarise the relationship or predict new cases. The name reached statistics through Francis Galton, who drew a straight line of a son's height on his father's; the estimation machinery is laid out in texts such as Draper and Smith's Applied Regression Analysis. The referent is a mathematical relationship estimated from data, usually by least squares, and the unit is a set of coefficients with their standard errors. This is a technique a researcher chooses and applies, not something that happens in the world, which is what separates it from the phenomenon Galton also described, where extreme scores drift back toward the average.[1]

Unit
A fitted relationship between an outcome and its predictors
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
Estimated coefficients and fit statistics from least squares or a related estimator

Statistics (phenomenon)

the tendency for an extreme measurement to be followed by one nearer the average when the two are imperfectly correlated.

The tendency for an extreme measurement to be followed, on a second measurement, by one closer to the average, whenever the two are less than perfectly correlated. Galton named it in Regression towards mediocrity in hereditary stature (1886), and Barnett, van der Pols, and Dobson's Regression to the mean: What it is and how to deal with it shows how it fools single-group before-and-after studies. The referent is not a model a researcher fits but a fact about repeated measurement: the unit is the expected shrinkage of an extreme score toward the mean. It shares the word and Galton's 1886 paper with regression analysis, yet one is a chosen method and this is a bias to guard against.[2][3]

Unit
The expected drift of an extreme score toward the average on retest
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
The gap between an extreme first measurement and a less extreme repeat

Psychoanalysis

a retreat, under stress or frustration, to thought or behaviour typical of an earlier stage of development.

A retreat, under stress or frustration, to a mode of thought or behaviour typical of an earlier stage of development. Freud set out the idea in his Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis, where libido that meets an obstacle can fall back along the path it has travelled toward earlier fixations. The referent is a mind, not a dataset: the unit is a person reverting to a younger way of coping, such as an adult sulking or clinging when overwhelmed. It borrows only the meaning of going backward from the statistical uses; there is no measured line and no mean, and the return is inferred clinically rather than computed.[4]

Unit
A person's return to an earlier developmental mode
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
Clinical observation of behaviour or fantasy typical of an earlier stage

Software engineering

A fixed defect that comes back

A defect that reappears in software that used to work, so a change breaks behaviour that previously passed. Yoo and Harman's survey Regression testing minimization, selection and prioritization frames the practice built to catch it: rerunning tests after each change to detect functionality that has broken. The referent is a codebase, and the unit is a single reintroduced fault, seen as a test that once passed and now fails. It shares with the psychoanalytic meaning the idea of slipping back to a worse state, but here the state is an artefact's behaviour, checked mechanically, not a person's mind read by a clinician.[5]

Unit
A previously fixed defect reintroduced into working software
Recovery means
Regression tests catch the reintroduced defect so it can be fixed before release
Measured by
Test failures on functionality that previously passed

Next

Run it through the Collider, or take the citations with you.

See how regression sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.

Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this collision

Nearby collisions

bias6 fields · 8 citationsjingle · one name, six constructsregression to the mean1 fields · 3 citationsanchor · a standalone constructprediction3 fields · 4 citationsjingle · one word, three constructs

References

  1. Draper, N. R., & Smith, H. (1998). Applied regression analysis (3rd ed.). Wiley.
  2. Galton, F. (1886). Regression towards mediocrity in hereditary stature. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 15, 246–263. https://doi.org/10.2307/2841583
  3. Barnett, A. G., van der Pols, J. C., & Dobson, A. J. (2005). Regression to the mean: What it is and how to deal with it. International Journal of Epidemiology, 34(1), 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyh299
  4. Freud, S. (1917). Introductory lectures on psycho-analysis. Hogarth Press.
  5. Yoo, S., & Harman, M. (2012). Regression testing minimization, selection and prioritization: A survey. Software Testing, Verification and Reliability, 22(2), 67–120. https://doi.org/10.1002/stvr.430

Cited on this page?

Confirm your construct, or correct us.

If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.

Claim your construct