Why is correlation not a proof that one thing causes another? How would this apply to the statement alot of kids who are violent watch violent video games therefore the video games are causing the violence.
2006-10-23 09:16:11 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Sociology
Correlation means that two variables change together, but not necessarily that one causes the other. The statement "a lot of kids who are violent watch violent video games, therefore the video games are causing the violence," is false, because there is no proof that the video games actually cause kids to become violent. It is just as likely that kids, who are already violent, are more likely to play violent video games. Or it could be something else causing them both. No causation is shown in this statement. It only shows a relationship between the two things.
2006-10-23 09:29:52 · answer #1 · answered by IElop 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because something else like, perhaps, their parents, make these kids violent. It doesn't have to be the video games.
It may also be true that these same kids watch violent video games because their parents do.
(I'm not claiming it's likely, just showing how a correlation is not a proof)
It would still be true to say that, "a lot of kids who are violent watch violent video games". This is a correlation but the video games did not cause the kids to be violent, their parents did.
To show that one thing caused another you would have to take a lot of kids of all sorts including violent and non-violent from a lot of different backgrounds and count how many of each type watched violent video games and became violent afterwards. Then you do some statistical analysis on the results and say something like, "We can be 90% certain that watching violent video games causes some kids to be more violent than they would otherwise be". It ain't easy.
2006-10-23 13:15:07 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The case you cite is a good example. Children who behave violently also tend to play violent video games. This would be a co-relation. One person might think that children who like to be violent will consequently enjoy violent video games. Another person might think that children who play violent video games will learn from the games to act violently.
The co-relation does not tell you whether either of these conclusions is correct. In fact, there are other possibilities. One is that there is really no connection, that the co relation is merely a coincidence.
Another is that a third factor causes both, for instance maybe children who have seen violence at home both act violently and enjoy violent video games.
Yet another is that the causation is more complex; maybe violent behavior and game playing encourage each other.
Besides, playing games may affect different kids in different ways.
2006-10-23 09:41:11 · answer #3 · answered by The First Dragon 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
'Correlation' is 'an association' with an event, whereas 'Causation' is a belief of the 'cause or trigger / reason of an event.'
The Correlation is that those kids who are violent, each watch / play violent games.
The Causation is the belief that those kids who watch violent games are triggered into being violent by the games - having no awareness of the damage that such violence has to the bodies they do damage to.
Further studies would need to be undertaken to establish this hypothesis.
Sash.
2006-10-23 09:58:44 · answer #4 · answered by sashtou 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Basically Causation has a direct factual and proven link to the effect. But correlation is just a possibility that two things are related.
There is a correlation between daytime and lots of people going to work or school. That is just a possible relationship. Just because it is daytime does not mean that lots of people WILL go to work.
But, if you cut off a normal person's head, it has been proven that they have a strong tendency to stop living. The Middle Ages had plenty of examples. That is a Causation.
2006-10-23 09:30:37 · answer #5 · answered by INTIKAB 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The word "correlation" just indicates that there's some kind of connection between two facts, but it doesn't mean that one is the cause of the other. Sometimes, it's the cause, sometimes the consequence, or sometimes the two facts just happen to always be present at the same time in many situations, but nobody knows which one is causing the other or if there really is a relation between both facts.
2016-03-28 05:16:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Causal chain - cause and effect
If I hit my toe with a hammer, the cause is the hammer hit and the effect is pain.
This shows causation, hammer hit toe leads to pain.
Also known as the causality factor.
Correlation shows that there is a tendency of statistical data to lean towards a certain factor or number of factors which could lead to the causality factor being identified and investigated using hypothesis testing - getting enough statistical data to support a hypothesis are reject it.
e.g. there is a hypothesis that the effect of violence is caused by video games.
2006-10-23 09:21:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
correlation is basically a network of probabilities among variables but causation show the direction of variables also.
magnitude of relationship is provided in correlation but not the direction.
2006-10-23 09:26:53 · answer #8 · answered by farzana 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the spelling stupid !!!!!!!!!!!!
2006-10-23 09:25:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋