Does Association Imply Causation? Sometimes, but not always! What about: –x=mother's BMI, y=daughter's BMI –x=amt. of saccharin in a rat's diet, y=# of.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Section 4.2. Correlation and Regression Describe only linear relationship. Strongly influenced by extremes in data. Always plot data first. Extrapolation.
Advertisements

AP Statistics Section 4.3 Establishing Causation
AP Statistics Chapters 3 & 4 Measuring Relationships Between 2 Variables.
Correlation AND EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Lesson Establishing Causation. Knowledge Objectives Identify the three ways in which the association between two variables can be explained. Define.
AP STATS: 50 point quiz Sit with your partner. This is open notes/textbook. Work for 20 minutes with your partner on the quiz. Each person will have to.
Causation. Learning Objectives By the end of this lecture, you should be able to: – Describe causation and the ways in which it differs from correlation.
 Pg : 3b, 6b (form and strength)  Page : 10b, 12a, 16c, 16e.
Chapter 4 Section 3 Establishing Causation
The Question of Causation
HW#9: read Chapter 2.6 pages On page 159 #2.122, page 160#2.124,
1 10. Causality and Correlation ECON 251 Research Methods.
 Correlation and regression are closely connected; however correlation does not require you to choose an explanatory variable and regression does. 
C HAPTER 4: M ORE ON T WO V ARIABLE D ATA Sec. 4.2 – Cautions about Correlation and Regression.
Looking at data: relationships - Caution about correlation and regression - The question of causation IPS chapters 2.4 and 2.5 © 2006 W. H. Freeman and.
Relationships Regression BPS chapter 5 © 2006 W.H. Freeman and Company.
Correlation and Regression continued…. Learning Objectives By the end of this lecture, you should be able to: – Interpret R 2 – Describe the purpose of.
Relationships Regression BPS chapter 5 © 2006 W.H. Freeman and Company.
1 Chapter 4: More on Two-Variable Data 4.1Transforming Relationships 4.2Cautions 4.3Relations in Categorical Data.
1 Chapter 4: More on Two-Variable Data 4.1Transforming Relationships 4.2Cautions 4.3Relations in Categorical Data.
4.3: Establishing Causation Both correlation and regression are very useful in describing the relationship between two variables; however, they are first.
Lecture Presentation Slides SEVENTH EDITION STATISTICS Moore / McCabe / Craig Introduction to the Practice of Chapter 2 Looking at Data: Relationships.
Chapter 7 Scatterplots, Association, and Correlation.
Chapter 5 Regression. u Objective: To quantify the linear relationship between an explanatory variable (x) and response variable (y). u We can then predict.
AP STATISTICS LESSON 4 – 2 ( DAY 1 ) Cautions About Correlation and Regression.
 What is an association between variables?  Explanatory and response variables  Key characteristics of a data set 1.
Lecture 5 Chapter 4. Relationships: Regression Student version.
Describing Relationships
Cautions About Correlation and Regression Section 4.2.
Section Causation AP Statistics ww.toddfadoir.com/apstats.
Prediction and Causation How do we predict a response? Explanatory Variables can be used to predict a response: 1. Prediction is based on fitting a line.
Lecture 7 Simple Linear Regression. Least squares regression. Review of the basics: Sections The regression line Making predictions Coefficient.
Scatterplots and Correlation Textbook Section 3.1.
4. Relationships: Regression
2.7 The Question of Causation
Cautions About Correlation and Regression Section 4.2
4. Relationships: Regression
Cautions About Correlation and Regression
Proving Causation Why do you think it was me?!.
Establishing Causation
Chapter 2 Looking at Data— Relationships
4.3: Using Studies Wisely.
Section 4.3 Types of Association
Chapter 2: Looking at Data — Relationships
Chapter 2 Looking at Data— Relationships
Register for AP Exams --- now there’s a $10 late fee per exam
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
Cautions about Correlation and Regression
Looking at data: relationships - Caution about correlation and regression - The question of causation IPS chapters 2.4 and 2.5 © 2006 W. H. Freeman and.
Lesson Using Studies Wisely.
Least-Squares Regression
EQ: What gets in the way of a good model?
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
Does Association Imply Causation?
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
29.) A. Overall, 11.88% of white defendants and 10.24% of black defendants receive the death penalty. For white victims, 12.58% of white defendants and.
4.2 Cautions about Correlation and Regression
Correlation/regression using averages
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
Section 6.2 Establishing Causation
Experiments Observational Study – observes individuals and measures variables of interest but does not attempt to influence the responses. Experiment.
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
Chapter 4: Designing Studies
Experiments Observational Study – observes individuals and measures variables of interest but does not attempt to influence the responses. Experiment.
Correlation/regression using averages
Presentation transcript:

Does Association Imply Causation? Sometimes, but not always! What about: –x=mother's BMI, y=daughter's BMI –x=amt. of saccharin in a rat's diet, y=# of tumors in rat's bladder –x=student's SAT score as a HS senior, y=1st year GPA in college –x=whether a person attends religious services, y=length of life –x=# years education a workder has, y=worker's income This figure (Moore & McCabe) gives three possible scenarios explaining a found association between a response variable y and an explanatory variable x:

Association between x and y can certainly be because changes in x cause y to change - but even when causation is present, there are still other variables possibly involved in the relationship. (first ex. above) Be careful of applying a causal relationship between x and y in one setting to a different setting: (second example shows a causal relationship in rats - does it extend to humans?) Common response is an example of how a "lurking variable" can influence both x and y, creating the association between them (see third example on SAT/GPA) Confounding between two variables arises when their effects on the response cannot be distinguished from each other - the confounding variables can either be explanatory or lurking… (see the last two examples above…)

Lurking variables A lurking variable is a variable not included in the study design that does have an effect on the variables studied. Lurking variables can falsely suggest a relationship. –What is the lurking variable in these two examples? Strong positive association between number of firefighters at a fire site and the amount of damage a fire does. – Negative association between moderate amounts of wine drinking and death rates from heart disease in developed nations.

There is quite some variation in BAC for the same number of beers drunk. A person’s blood volume is a factor in the equation that we have overlooked. The scatter is much smaller now. One’s weight was indeed influencing the response variable “blood alcohol content.” Now we change number of beers to number of beers/weight of person in lb.

Lurking vs. confounding, association vs. causation A lurking variable is a variable that is not among the explanatory or response variables in a study and yet may influence the interpretation of relationships among those variables. Two variables are confounded when their effects on a response variable cannot be distinguished from each other. The confounded variables may be either explanatory variables or lurking variables. But you often see the terms lurking and confounding used interchangeably… Association and causation –Association, however strong, does NOT imply causation. –Only careful experimentation can show causation - but see the next example…

Establishing causation It appears that lung cancer is associated with smoking. How do we know that both of these variables are not being affected by an unobserved third (lurking) variable? For instance, what if there is a genetic predisposition that causes people to both get lung cancer and become addicted to smoking, but the smoking itself doesn’t CAUSE lung cancer? 1)The association is strong. 2)The association is consistent. 3)Higher doses are associated with stronger responses. 4)Alleged cause precedes the effect. 5)The alleged cause is plausible. We can evaluate the association using the following criteria: