yes.True experiments enable us to draw conclusions about causality. Relational (correlational) studies do not.?
Correlation does not equal causation. X and Y's relationship might be influenced by Z's (a third factor) relationship. Z is controlled in a true experiment that is why it allows us to draw a conclusion. Of course, making the case for a ';true experiment'; is an undertaking in itself. That is why there is such thing as peer review.
You are correct. Correlation does not equal causation. And yet it is a common rhetorical device to make it seem so. For example, many people cite studies that indicate everyone who ends up addicted to heroin started with the ';gateway'; drug of Marijuana. This makes it seem as though there is a causal relationship between the two, that using marijuana causes the use of heroin. However, it is merely correlative, not causal. What isn't being taken into account are the millions upon millions who have used marijuana and yet have never used ';harder'; drugs. And, if you want to illustrate the absurdity of the that kind of correlative argument, we can say that breast milk and baby formula out to be outlawed because everyone who uses heroin started out by using mother's milk or a baby formula.
No comments:
Post a Comment