I disagree with the statement that Anselin and Getis’s article is completely irrelevant today. I think that the point they are making about being careful with the toolbox is even more crucial today. Yes, tremendous steps have been made in terms of tools and methods in spatial stats but the questions behind the computerized processes still need to be well asked. We cannot let ourselves be led by the GIS tools. The authors give great examples of wrong maps being made because of misinterpretation of data. We can do statistics blindly with any data, and we will have results at the end no matter what. However, it’s not guarantee that the results will mean anything. The analyses have to be well supported to give meaning and interpretation to the results. I will end by quoting the authors: ”the technology should be led by theoretical and methodological developments in the field itself.”
S_Ram