The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Non Life Sciences
  3. Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology
  4. Correlation vs association
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Correlation vs association

  • 3 Replies
  • 1834 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jinjon (OP)

  • First timers
  • *
  • 4
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Correlation vs association
« on: 24/05/2022 16:36:47 »
Hi,

I am wondering if it is a mistake to write the results of linear regression and logistic regression analysis as that the variables that you have analysed: do or do not correlate with each other.
Or is it wrong to say that they are correlated to each other and you should say that there is an association ( or no association) between the variables?

For example a is the independent variable, b is the dependent variable. You apply linear regression or logistic regression and report the results as:

a is correlatad with b or not correlated with b...

Hope you understand what I mean.

Logged
 



Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • ********
  • 11035
  • Activity:
    9%
  • Thanked: 1486 times
Re: Correlation vs association
« Reply #1 on: 24/05/2022 23:35:29 »
Quote from: OP
a is the independent variable, b is the dependent variable
I know that this is normal terminology, but it implies a causal direction.
- If there is some variable in your experiment that you can easily control, and another variable that you can easily measure, then it is fair to say that "when I changed variable x, variable y changed in a (linear/parabolic/exponential) manner"

However, when it comes to complex things like the impact of obesity in a human population on heart attacks:
- There is no easy way to control obesity in a whole population
- There is no easy way to control heart attacks in a whole population
- There are many factors which can cause heart attacks (eg genetics, congenital problems, education on exercise, stress)
- There are many factors which can cause obesity (eg genetics, income, education on healthy diet, stress)
- So the easiest thing to do is to do some sort of scatterplot of obesity vs age of first heart attack
- Then do a regression line through it, to conclude that  "with increased variable x, variable y changes in a (linear/parabolic/exponential) manner"
- You could hypothesize that obesity contributes to heart attacks (since the obesity was present before the first heart attack), but it's not guaranteed: Someone who has an underlying heart condition may be predisposed to a sedentary lifestyle, which may make them obese.
- You could make comments like "For patients with BMI > 30, a weight reduction of 1 kg is associated with a delay of z years in age of first heart attack."
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: jinjon

Offline Eternal Student

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1832
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 470 times
Re: Correlation vs association
« Reply #2 on: 25/05/2022 00:56:18 »
Hi.

    Good general discussion from @evan_au above.

Quote from: jinjon on 24/05/2022 16:36:47
is it wrong to say that they are correlated to each other
    No it's not "wrong" it's just a bit dangerous or could be misunderstood.
    Essentially it depends on your target audience  -  the people who you expect to read your statements.

The phrase  "X and Y are uncorrelated" has a precise meaning to a Statistician or Mathematician.   It means precisely r(X,Y) = 0    (the correlation coefficient = 0)  and nothing more.    They won't jump to any other conclusions, in particular they won't assume that X and Y are completely unrelated or independent variables.  They know that X could still be entirely determined by Y, they just aren't linearly related.

The phrase "X and Y are correlated"   would just mean that r(x,Y) equals anything else other than 0.   To be honest, that's a rare phrase to use for statisticians.  It would be more common to take more lines and state that r(X,Y) cannot be zero but its not clear that a linear relationship exists  or else just leave it written in symbols   r(X,Y) ≠ 0.    If you did leave that phrase "X and Y are correlated" as if it was some sort of final conclusion then they might reasonably assume you meant that  X and Y are strongly correlated,    or  that   |r(x,Y)| ≈ 1.   To say that in plain English - they might assume that X is (or is almost entirely explained by) a linear function of Y.

    If your target audience is not a group of statisticians,  then you "know" that when people hear the words   "correlated"  or  "uncorrelated"   they will jump to conclusions about whether X and Y are independent or unrelated.   They might make even bigger jumps than that and assume one thing is actually the cause of the other.    So if your target audience isn't a group of statisticians, then you really must do as @evan_au  suggested and choose your phrases more carefully.

Best Wishes.
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: jinjon

Offline jinjon (OP)

  • First timers
  • *
  • 4
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
Re: Correlation vs association
« Reply #3 on: 27/05/2022 16:01:27 »
Thank you guys for the help!
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.359 seconds with 39 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.