Subscribe in a reader

Buy Conservative Advertising

Wikio - Top Blogs

Find the best blogs at

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

No one but the author bears any responsibility for the non-advertising content on this blog. AND PLEASE NOTE: the author neither necessarily uses nor endorses any product advertised on this blog.

« "Study: Omega-3 Supplements May Actually Affect Aging" | Main | Unimpresssed »

October 16, 2012

"Why do people love to say that correlation does not imply causation?"

Daniel Engber at Slate observes that use of the phrase seems to have skyrocketed in the past 50 years and he speculates that it's because we are now more concerned about false positives than false negatives. 


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Michael Greenspan

I need to think about his conclusion, but he makes sense on misuse of the phrase. Which means I've been misusing it. Damn.

Also interesting: the reference to McCloskey and Ziliak and statistical significance. Something I'd never considered.

Paul Jaminet

Perhaps we need a counter-catchphrase, like "Correlation is correlated with causation."

Bruce Charlton supports Engber's idea that we fear false positives more than in the past, but offers a different reason why, in this post: He thinks the rise of media and the Internet has led modern intellectuals to conceive of themselves as straining vast amounts of information to find a few nuggets of truth. We have more low-quality information around than in the past, so avoiding false positives is more important.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Powered by TypePad
Member since 07/2003

Shelfari: Book reviews on your book blog