Assessing whether there is a plausible causal mechanism that could explain a correlation...
A. is not necessary when we find a correlation in a population that had a < .05 probability of happening by chance, since we can reject the "mere chance" hypothesis regardless of how implausible the causal mechanism is
B. is important because unless we find a correlation in a population that had a < .05 probability of happening by chance, we can reject the "mere chance" hypothesis if the causal mechanism is sufficiently implausible
C. is important because even when we find a correlation in a population that had a < .05 probability of happening by chance, whether we should reject the "mere chance" hypothesis can depend on the plausibility of the causal mechanism
D. is not necessary, but when the mechanism is sufficiently plausible, we should never reject the causal hypothesis regardless of whether the correlation is statistically significant
Ans: C. is important because even when we find a correlation in a population that had a < .05 probability of happening by chance, whether we should reject the "mere chance" hypothesis can depend on the plausibility of the causal mechanism
You might also like to view...
According to St. Thomas, a series of efficient causes cannot stretch to infinity because
A) if there is no first among efficient causes, neither will there be a last or an intermediate. B) there exists a regular order of efficient causes. C) something must exist contingently. D) God revealed this truth in the scriptures.
The overall cost of houses has increased by 9% in the past four years. Therefore, the cost of
this house has increased by 9% these past four years.
What will be an ideal response?Amniocentesis carries no risks and is considered a routine procedure
Indicate whether the statement is true or false
As a senior manager operating in another country, how should you enforce U.S. ethical standards in a culture that has different standards?
Please provide the best answer for the statement.