Definition: Establishes whether there is a statistical relationship between two variables.
Example:
Research Question: Is there a relationship between the amount of time a student studies and the score received on a quiz?
Variables:
Number of minutes studied
Quiz scores
Method: Administer a quiz and ask students to report study duration, then record the scores.
Types of Correlational Relationships:
Positive Correlation
Negative Correlation
Zero Correlation
Definition: An increase in the value of one variable corresponds with an increase in the other variable.
Visual Representation: Scatterplot
Example: As minutes studied increases, quiz scores also increase.
Important Note: Causation cannot be assumed. A correlation does not imply that increased study time causes a higher score.
Definition: An increase in the value of one variable results in a decrease in the value of the other variable.
Visual Representation: Scatterplot
Example: Variables include 'Number of Hours of Netflix Watched' and 'Test Grades.' More Netflix viewing is correlated with lower test grades.
Important Note: Again, causation cannot be determined based on correlation alone.
Definition: No relationship exists between the two variables.
Visual Representation: Scatterplot
Example: Comparing 'Number of Pounds of Candy Eaten' and 'Test Grades,' showing no correlation.
Appropriate Scenarios: a. In the early stages of research to gather data. b. When variable manipulation is impossible or unethical. c. When relating two naturally occurring variables.
Additional Insights:
Direction:
Positive or Negative indicated by scatterplot.
Magnitude:
Strength of relationship indicated by the absolute value of the correlation coefficient.
Values range from –1.00 to +1.00.
Example Scale:
Strong: |0.80| - |1.00|
Moderate: |0.40| - |0.60|
Weak: |0.10| - |0.20|
Important Considerations: A. Absence of independent variables:
Causal relationships require at least one variable to be manipulated.B. Third Variable Problem:
Possibility exists that an unmeasured variable may influence the relationship, leading to incorrect assumptions of causation.
The danger is mistaking correlation for causation when a third variable might be influencing the two main variables.