Divorces and Margarine One study showed that there is a very h...

Question

Divorces and Margarine One study showed that there is a very high correlation between the divorce rate in Maine and per capita consumption of margarine in the United States. Can we conclude that either one of those two variables is the cause of the other?

Accepted Answer

All right. Hello, everyone. So this question says, a study found a strong correlation between the number of ice cream sales and the number of forest fires in a given year. Can we conclude that one of these two factors is causing the other. Option A says no correlation does not imply causation. Option B says yes, a strong correlation proves causation. C says yes, because both variables change in the same way. And option D says no, but there might be a hidden factor affecting both variables. So this is a question about correlation versus causation. So first, the two variables in question are ice cream sales. And forest fires. So according to the story, the study in question, excuse me, as the number of ice cream sales increases, so too does the number of forest fires. So first, what do correlation and causation actually refer to? Well, first and foremost, recall that a correlation is about the two variables tending to change together. So in this case, there's a correlation between the two variables. Because both of these are changing together, that is the study in question found that both of these are changing at the same time. But causation means that one variable directly influences the other. So, while there is a correlation in this particular case, is there causation? That is, does one variable cause the other to change as well? And the answer is no, right? Correlation does not imply causation. And when you look at the two variables being considered here, it's difficult to see a link between them, right? Buying more ice cream will not cause more forest fires directly. So sometimes when you see a correlation between two things that actually don't have a causation between them, it's possible that something else is affecting both of them. Which would appear Or which would make these two variables appear to be related to each other. One example would be temperature. Right, because not only, or rather, when the temperature increases when temperature goes up, not only would people more likely buy more ice cream, the likelihood of forest fires also increases. This is an example of spurious correlation, which means that two variables that appear unrelated to each other. Are connected because of an external factor. So in this case, we can't say that either variable causes the other. Instead, the correlation exists because of an external factor like temperature. Which means that D is our correct answer. So it reads, no, but there might be a hidden factor affecting both variables. And there you have it. So with that being said, thank you so very much for watching, and I hope you found this helpful.

��app