{"id":2320,"date":"2012-10-08T11:55:18","date_gmt":"2012-10-08T09:55:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cognitionandculture.local\/?p=2320"},"modified":"2024-02-24T10:39:50","modified_gmt":"2024-02-24T09:39:50","slug":"the-spread-of-correlation-does-not-imply-causation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cognitionandculture.local\/blogs\/icci-blog\/the-spread-of-correlation-does-not-imply-causation\/","title":{"rendered":"The spread of “Correlation does not imply causation”"},"content":{"rendered":"
Daniel Engber’s short article at Slate on the success of the misleading formula “correlation does not imply causation” is doubly relevant here: as an example of the epidemiology of a scientific idea, and as a corrective to a clich\u00e9 all too common in the social sciences:<\/p>\n
“So how did a stats-class admonition become so misused and so widespread? What made this simple caveat\u2014a warning not to fall too hard for correlation coefficients\u2014into a coup de grace for second-rate debates? A survey shows the slogan to be a computer-age phenomenon, one that spread through print culture starting in the 1960s and then redoubled its frequency with the advent of the Internet.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n