1/6
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Pearson’s R
Correlation coefficient that quantifies the strength of a correlation between quantitative variables
Good for measuring linear relations, NOT good for nonlinear relationships
Between -1 & 1
correlational research
Non-experimental research, no manipulation of independent variable or causal conclusions
Can test many different research questions
Is conscientiousness associated with lifespan?
Is neuroticism linked to cardiovascular disease?
How are antagonism and romantic satisfaction related?
reasons for correlational research
Researchers don’t think relationship is causal or are not interested in causality
Cannot manipulate independent variable
Unethical, not possible, or not practical
Establish reliability and validity of measures
Can be higher in external validity than controlled experiments
Can provide additional, converging evidence following experiments
restriction of range
It is important to ensure variables in your study are not limited/restricted in range
Is there full coverage of the entire variable?
Restriction of range can bias correlation coefficients, resulting in misleading statistical

the bidirectionality problem
Correlational research cannot tell us the causal directionality of a relationship; X could cause Y, but Y could also cause X
Ex: Stress is correlated with insomnia (stress could cause poor sleep, but poor sleep could also cause stress)
the third variable problem
Two variables could be related because of a THIRD unmeasured variable (or confound)
Ex: Drownings are correlated with ice cream sales
Third variable: temperature (people are more likely to be in pools, people are more likely to want to eat ice cream)
Spurious correlations
Spurious correlations
Correlations affected by confounding variables