Causation entails correlation, but correlation does not entail causation.
The crucial problem the study had to solve was the old causation-correlation problem.
This article represents an usual circumstance in which scholars not only make the mistake of implying causation from correlation...but the correlation is in the complete wrong direction.
Causation and correlation are often confused, however, as many studies have demonstrated.
Dan Bergstein on the causation vs. correlation conundrum, as related to writing output and pudding intake.
We are carefully reminded of the limited relevance that laboratory studies may have for real world scenarios, and exhorted repeatedly not to confuse causation and correlation.
"It's right to be cautious about findings from epidemiological studies on this where you can't be sure about causation and correlation," he said.
And the study is retrospective, so conclusions about causation and correlation are impossible to establish.
Much of the second half is taken up with the devilishly tricky business of trying to extract causation from correlation.
Before optogenetics, neuroscientists were faced with the intractable nightmare of separating causation from correlation, knowing (sometimes) which neurons were associated with a given process without knowing which ones actually performed a given computation.
