Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The phrase " correlation does not imply causation " refers to the inability to legitimately deduce a cause-and-effect relationship between two events or variables solely on the basis of an observed association or correlation between them. [ 1 ][ 2 ] The idea that "correlation implies causation" is an example of a questionable-cause logical ...
Whereas a mediator is a factor in the causal chain (top), a confounder is a spurious factor incorrectly implying causation (bottom) In statistics, a spurious relationship or spurious correlation [1] [2] is a mathematical relationship in which two or more events or variables are associated but not causally related, due to either coincidence or the presence of a certain third, unseen factor ...
Causal inference is the process of determining the independent, actual effect of a particular phenomenon that is a component of a larger system. The main difference between causal inference and inference of association is that causal inference analyzes the response of an effect variable when a cause of the effect variable is changed. [ 1 ][ 2 ...
Bradford Hill criteria. The Bradford Hill criteria, otherwise known as Hill's criteria for causation, are a group of nine principles that can be useful in establishing epidemiologic evidence of a causal relationship between a presumed cause and an observed effect and have been widely used in public health research.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin: 'after this, therefore because of this') is an informal fallacy which one commits when one reasons, "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X." It is a fallacy in which an event is presumed to have been caused by a closely preceding event merely on the grounds of temporal succession.
The correlation reflects the noisiness and direction of a linear relationship (top row), but not the slope of that relationship (middle), nor many aspects of nonlinear relationships (bottom). N.B.: the figure in the center has a slope of 0 but in that case, the correlation coefficient is undefined because the variance of Y is zero.
The fallacy of the single cause, also known as complex cause, causal oversimplification, [1] causal reductionism, root cause fallacy, and reduction fallacy, [2] is an informal fallacy of questionable cause that occurs when it is assumed that there is a single, simple cause of an outcome when in reality it may have been caused by a number of only jointly sufficient causes.
Mind projection fallacy – assuming that a statement about an object describes an inherent property of the object, rather than a personal perception. Moralistic fallacy – inferring factual conclusions from evaluative premises in violation of fact–value distinction (e.g.: inferring is from ought).