Question

Does correlation mean the same thing as causation? In other
words, if there exists a strong correlation between two variables,
does that necessarily mean that one variable causes the other?
Support your answer with examples.

Answer #1

Correlation is a statistical measure that describes the
relationship between two or more variables. A positive correlation
indicates that two variables increase or decrease in parallel and a
negative correlation indicates that if one variable increases then
other decreases. A correlation between variables exists then it
does not automatically mean that the change in one variable is the
cause of the change in the values of the other variable.

Causation indicates that one event is the result of the occurrence
of the other event; i.e. there is a causal relationship between the
two events.

So if there exists a strong correlation between two variables
then it does not necessarily mean that one variable causes the
other.

Example: We know, smoking **causes** an increase in
the risk of developing lung cancer. But smoking is
**correlated** with alcoholism, but it **does
not cause** alcoholism.

If two variables are/ have a strong linear correlation, does
this mean that one is the cause of the other? Give your opinion and
support it with examples

One of the major misconceptions about correlation is that a
relationship between two variables means causation; that is, one
variable causes changes in the other variable. There is a
particular tendency to make this causal error, when the two
variables seem to be related to each other.
What is one instance where you have seen correlation
misinterpreted as causation? Please describe
Can you help me understand how to answer this question

One of the major misconceptions about correlation is that a
relationship between two variables means causation; that is, one
variable causes changes in the other variable. There is a
particular tendency to make this causal error, when the two
variables seem to be related to each other.
What is one instance where you have seen correlation
misinterpreted as causation? Please describe.
an orginal post please

A strong correlation does not mean a cause and effect
relationship. Causation is only one explanation of an observed
association. What else could produce a strong correlation?
Select one:
a. central limit theorem
b. a confounding factor, coincidence or a common cause
c. data mining
d. binomial distribution

Correlation =/= Causation
A lot of data is correlated. In some cases, this is because one
variable causes another. In other cases, things are correlated and
neither thing cause the other. I would like for you to think of one
such example. 2 variables must be (believably) correlated, but one
clearly doesn't cause the other. Thus, your response should have 4
parts to it...
~Thing 1
~Thing 2
~Ridiculous claim- thing 1 causes thing 2 or thing 2 causes
thing...

1) What are the differences between a bar graph and a
histogram.
2) A scatter plot describes a graph of bivariate data. If
strong correlation exists between the 2 variables, does that mean
that one causes the other? Explain.
3) A scatter plot describes a graph of bivariate data. If
there's weak correlation exists between the 2 variables, does that
mean that one causes the other? Explain.

1. Which correlation indicates a strong positive straight-line
relationship?
a. 0.4 b. -0.75 c. 1.5 d. 0.0 e. 0.99
2. The correlation between two variables is of -0.8. We can
conclude that
a. an increase in one variable causes a decrease in the other
variable.
b. there is a strong, positive association between the two
variables.
c. there is a strong, negative association between the two
variables.
d. a decrease in one variable causes an increase in the other
variable....

Provide a specific reason why finding a correlation between two
variables does not support a hypothesis that one causes the
other?

One hears versions of the expression "correlation does not mean
causation" so often - especially as a graduate student - that it
can be easy to accept the statement as true without giving the
matter some careful consideration.
Is it ALWAYS true that correlation does not imply (or suggest)
causation? Does correlation NEVER imply (or suggest) causation? Are
there any conditions under which we might have good reason to think
that a causal relationship does exist on the basis of...

Which statement explains why correlation could be 0 even if a
strong relationship between two variables existed?
Group of answer choices
Since the correlation is 0, there is no strong relationship
between the two variables; and a scatterplot would be
misleading.
Correlation can be 0 even if there is a strong linear
relationship between the variables.
Correlation only measures the strength of the relationship
between two variables when the units of the two variables are the
same.
Correlation does not...

ADVERTISEMENT

Get Answers For Free

Most questions answered within 1 hours.

ADVERTISEMENT

asked 15 minutes ago

asked 25 minutes ago

asked 31 minutes ago

asked 1 hour ago

asked 1 hour ago

asked 1 hour ago

asked 1 hour ago

asked 1 hour ago

asked 1 hour ago

asked 1 hour ago

asked 1 hour ago

asked 1 hour ago