Difference between revisions of "Correlation"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Correlation does not imply causation moved to Correlation) |
(Correlation and causation) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | ==Correlation and causation== | |
| + | "Correlation does not imply causation" is a phrase used in [[statistics]] to point out that a [[correlation]] between two variables should not imply that one variable has not caused a change in the other. It is a [[logical fallacy]] to assume that correlation implies causation. | ||
The following is a flawed argument: | The following is a flawed argument: | ||
Revision as of 20:16, October 13, 2007
Correlation and causation
"Correlation does not imply causation" is a phrase used in statistics to point out that a correlation between two variables should not imply that one variable has not caused a change in the other. It is a logical fallacy to assume that correlation implies causation.
The following is a flawed argument:
- Event A occurs in concurrence with Event B
- Therefore, Event A causes Event B
This is flawed because:
- There may be a confounding factor causing A and B
- B may cause A
- The relationship may be a complete coincidence
Examples
- As sales of ice cream rise, so do reports of shark attacks
- High sales of ice cream cause shark attacks
Flaw: Shark attacks and ice cream sales follow a seasonal pattern. Both rise in the summer months. The seasons are a confounding variable.
- Since the construction of a stadium began in Alaska, the value of your home in Texas has risen
- Stadium construction in Alaska causes higher home values in Texas
Flaw: This is a coincidence between unrelated variables.