Unlock hundreds more features
Save your Quiz to the Dashboard
View and Export Results
Use AI to Create Quizzes and Analyse Results

OR
Sign inSign in with Facebook
Sign inSign in with Google
Quizzes > Mathematics > Advanced Math

Master Correlation vs Causation: Take the Quiz Now

Think you can ace this causation vs correlation quiz? Dive in and test your understanding now!

Difficulty: Moderate
2-5mins
Learning OutcomesCheat Sheet
Paper art illustration with graphs arrows and check marks for causation vs correlation quiz on teal background.

This quiz helps you tell correlation and causation apart in real data and everyday claims. You'll answer short items using graphs and small cases to judge what truly causes what. Use it to check gaps before a test, and get more visual practice with scatter plot practice .

Which of the following best describes a correlation between two variables?
One variable directly causes the other to change.
Variables that have no relationship with each other.
They vary together, but one does not necessarily cause the other.
Variables that change randomly without any pattern.
Correlation measures the degree to which two variables move together, but it does not establish that one variable causes changes in the other. A high correlation coefficient simply indicates a statistical association. Misinterpreting correlation as causation is a common error in data analysis. For more detail, see .
In which scenario is a causal relationship most likely?
Ice cream sales and drowning accidents.
Shoe size and reading ability.
Number of firefighters and damage from fires.
Smoking and lung cancer.
Extensive research has demonstrated that smoking causes lung cancer, establishing a direct causal link through biological mechanisms. The other examples are classic cases of spurious correlation or reverse causation. Correlation alone would not prove causality in those scenarios. For further reading, see .
What term describes a negative correlation between two variables?
Both variables increase together.
No observable relationship.
As one increases, the other decreases.
Variables vary randomly.
A negative correlation means that as one variable's values rise, the other's values fall, indicating an inverse linear relationship. This is distinct from positive correlation where both variables move in the same direction. Understanding the sign of the correlation coefficient is key to interpreting data patterns. More information is available at .
What is a confounding variable in a study?
A measurement error in data collection.
A variable that mediates the effect of the independent on the dependent variable.
A variable that is intentionally manipulated.
A hidden factor that influences both the independent and dependent variables.
A confounding variable is an outside influence that affects both the presumed cause and the observed effect, potentially leading to a spurious association. Recognizing and controlling for confounders is essential in research design. Failure to account for a confounder can invalidate causal conclusions. See for more details.
Why can correlation alone not establish causation?
Because correlation measures causality directly.
Because correlation only applies to linear relationships.
Because correlation coefficients always have large errors.
Because correlated variables may be influenced by external factors or coincidence.
Correlation identifies associations but cannot rule out alternative explanations like confounding variables or reverse causation. Two variables may correlate due to chance or because both are driven by a third factor. Establishing causation requires additional criteria such as temporal precedence and experimental control. For more, visit .
If a study reports a Pearson correlation coefficient of r = -0.6, what does this imply?
A moderate negative linear relationship between variables.
A strong positive linear relationship between variables.
No linear relationship between variables.
A perfect negative linear relationship.
A Pearson r of -0.6 indicates a moderately strong inverse linear association: as one variable increases, the other tends to decrease. It is not strong enough to be considered near-perfect (which would be close to -1.0). Understanding the magnitude and sign of r is fundamental in interpreting bivariate data. See for details.
Ice cream sales and drowning incidents often rise together in summer. What is the most likely explanation?
There is no statistical relationship between them.
Drowning incidents cause people to buy ice cream.
A confounding variable, temperature, influences both variables.
Ice cream consumption directly causes drowning.
Higher temperatures in summer increase both ice cream consumption and swimming activity, leading to more drownings. Temperature acts as a confounding variable that drives both observed trends. This scenario illustrates why correlation without context can be misleading. More information can be found at .
Among these research designs, which is considered the strongest for inferring causal relationships?
Case series.
Randomized controlled trial.
Observational cohort study.
Cross-sectional study.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assign subjects to treatment or control groups by chance, minimizing bias and confounding. This experimental control and randomization make RCTs the gold standard for establishing causality. Observational designs cannot fully eliminate confounding without randomization. For more, see .
In multiple regression, why do researchers "control for" additional variables?
To guarantee causation between variables.
To reduce confounding and isolate the effect of the primary independent variable.
To decrease the variability in the dependent variable.
To increase the sample size artificially.
Controlling for variables means including them in the regression model to account for their influence, thereby reducing potential confounding. This helps better estimate the unique effect of the main predictor on the outcome. It does not guarantee causation but improves internal validity. Read more at .
In causal inference, what is the primary purpose of using an instrumental variable?
To directly manipulate the independent variable.
To standardize measurement units.
To visually display the relationship between variables.
To address unobserved confounding by providing a source of random variation.
An instrumental variable (IV) serves as a proxy that is correlated with the treatment but not with unobserved confounders, thus isolating causal effects. By leveraging the random-like variation from the IV, researchers can obtain unbiased estimates even in the presence of hidden biases. Proper IV analysis is complex and requires strong assumptions. For an in-depth overview, see .
0
{"name":"Which of the following best describes a correlation between two variables?", "url":"https://www.quiz-maker.com/QPREVIEW","txt":"Which of the following best describes a correlation between two variables?, In which scenario is a causal relationship most likely?, What term describes a negative correlation between two variables?","img":"https://www.quiz-maker.com/3012/images/ogquiz.png"}

Study Outcomes

  1. Analyze scenario-based relationships -

    Dissect quiz scenarios to determine whether observed associations reflect true causation or mere correlation.

  2. Identify common causation pitfalls -

    Spot errors like confounding variables and spurious correlations that can mislead causal interpretations.

  3. Distinguish correlation from causation -

    Clearly differentiate between statistical associations and causal relationships in varied contexts.

  4. Evaluate evidence critically -

    Assess the strength and validity of data to support or refute causal claims.

  5. Apply critical thinking strategies -

    Utilize analytical techniques to question assumptions and uncover hidden factors in data.

  6. Enhance analytical skillset -

    Improve your ability to interpret results and make informed conclusions in research and everyday scenarios.

Cheat Sheet

  1. Correlation vs. Causation Distinction -

    Understanding that correlation simply measures the strength and direction of a relationship (e.g., Pearson's r = 0.8) and does not prove one variable causes the other is crucial. A handy mnemonic from Cornell University is "Correlation is not Causation," which reminds you to look for true causality beyond a high r-value. In our correlation and causation quick check, always ask "Why?" before jumping to cause-and-effect conclusions.

  2. Role of Confounding Variables -

    Confounders are hidden factors that affect both variables, potentially creating a spurious correlation (for example, ice cream sales and drowning rates both rise in summer). Reviewing cases like Simpson's Paradox on reputable sources (Stanford University) shows how aggregated data can mislead without accounting for subgroups. Always consider third variables in your causation vs correlation quiz analyses to avoid flawed interpretations.

  3. Experimental Design & Randomization -

    Controlled experiments with random assignment (e.g., treatment vs. control groups) are the gold standard for establishing causation, as highlighted by the NIH Office of Extramural Research. Randomization helps balance confounders, ensuring differences in outcomes arise from the treatment itself. In a causation vs correlation quiz, look for mentions of blinding and control groups as key indicators of strong causal inference.

  4. Statistical vs. Practical Significance -

    A tiny p-value (p < 0.05) may show statistical significance but might not translate to real-world impact; always check the effect size (e.g., Cohen's d). According to APA guidelines, reporting both p-values and confidence intervals gives a fuller picture of whether findings are meaningful beyond mere chance. When you test correlation knowledge, don't forget to distinguish between what's statistically detectable and what's genuinely important.

  5. Causal Inference Criteria (Bradford Hill) -

    The Bradford Hill criteria (temporality, strength, consistency, dose - response) from epidemiology offer a checklist for evaluating causation claims in observational studies. A useful mnemonic is "BRRRCC" (Biological plausibility, Reversibility, Recognizing dose-response, etc.) to remember these nine viewpoints. Incorporating these criteria into your correlation causation trivia boosts your ability to discern myths from facts.

Make a Quiz (FREE) Copy & Edit This Quiz Create a Quiz with AI

Advanced Math Quizzes

Powered by: Quiz Maker