What this answers
This calculator answers "given my sample's correlation, what range of true population correlations is plausible?" A correlation of exactly .50 in one sample and .50 in a much larger sample carry very different amounts of certainty, and this interval makes that difference explicit.
How it is calculated
Pearson's r is not symmetrically distributed, especially as it approaches negative 1 or 1, so a plain normal interval on r itself would perform poorly. The Fisher z transform maps r onto a scale where the sampling distribution is approximately normal with a known standard error of 1 divided by the square root of n minus 3. The interval is built in that transformed z space using a standard normal critical value, then converted back to the r scale with the inverse hyperbolic tangent (tanh) function, which is why the resulting interval is not symmetric around r itself even though it is symmetric in z.
Worked example
For r equal to .5 with n equal to 30, the Fisher z value is about 0.549, with a standard error of 1 divided by the square root of 27, about 0.192. At 95% confidence, the z interval runs from about 0.172 to 0.926, which converts back through tanh to an r interval of roughly .17 to .73. Notice this interval is noticeably wider on the low side than a naive symmetric guess would suggest, exactly the asymmetry the Fisher transform is built to handle correctly.
Assumption audit
What this interval does not mean
A correlation confidence interval does not tell you whether the relationship is linear, causal, or driven by a third variable; it only quantifies sampling uncertainty around the specific linear-association number you supplied. A narrow interval around a small r still describes a weak relationship precisely, not a strong one.
Limitations
This calculator assumes the Pearson correlation model is appropriate for your data; if the relationship is strongly nonlinear or driven by a handful of outliers, consider the Spearman Rank Correlation Calculator instead, whose interval this page does not provide.