Explain why correlation does not prove causation. Give an original example that illustrates confusing correlation and causation.
Correlation is the relation between two variables. Causation exists when one variable or event is the direct result of another variable or event. It does not mean that one of the variables has any influence on the other variable in a causal way. Correlation can be present between two variables without the variables being causally related in either direction. It is likely that for one variable the opposite is also true, therefore correlation does not always prove causation. An example would be if you did a study and found that when people went over the speed limit they were less likely to get into an accident. You do research to make sure this is correct even though it sounds absurd. After your research it still seems that more speed equals less accidents. Coming to the conclusion that when people speed there will be less accidents, so increasing the speed limit would decrease accidents. this decision or conclusion would be a grave mistake obviously.
Correlation is a statistical measure (expressed as a number) that describes the size and direction of a relationship between two or more variables. A correlation between variables, however, does not automatically mean that the change in one variable is the cause of the change in the values of the other variable.
Causation indicates that one event is the result of the occurrence of the other event; i.e. there is a causal relationship between the two events. This is also referred to as cause and effect.
For instance, people may assume that just because a student studies around the clock, they are going to have a high GPA. On the contrary, just because a person has a high GPA does not mean that they study 24/7.
What are the evolutionary advantages and disadvantages of having specialized functions in various parts of the brain?
Throughout our history of being human we have developed and evolved physically as well as mentally. Ours have evolved and changed which allows us to understand and comprehend more than in our earlier years of being. We have a natural ability to adapt to survive. For example, as our brains are developing they are adapting to our surroundings. When we are children and do not understand that the hot stove will burn you, we touch and which sends messages to our brain that tells the body that it hurts. We therefore know not to touch the hot stove. This is an advantage to survive as humans however, this can also be a disadvantage because as we adapt and grow it can also limit how we live and what are fears are. And living by fear is no way to live and can limit new experiences.
Of the two psychological approaches, how would a behaviorist psychologist's treatment differ from a psychologist who practices psychoanalysis?
The behaviorist psychologist is primarily focused on explaining a person's behavior by observing them. They hold the belief that the environment is what causes us to behave differently or suffer from certain illnesses. Behaviorist psychologists focus on the conscious mind. On the other hand, the psychoanalytic psychologist focuses on the importance of the unconscious mind, not the conscious mind. Psychoanalysts believe that behavior is determined by your past experiences that are left in the unconscious mind.
Discuss (with research citations) the concept of negative reinforcement. Is it always connected with punishment?
Negative reinforcement occurs when 1) a behavior is followed by the removal or avoidance of a negative event, and 2) the probability that the behavior will occur in the future increases as a result. One psychologist, Dr. Gary McClure, likens negative reinforcement to arithmetic: positive reinforcement means something is added, and negative reinforcement means something is subtracted (taken away).
The concept of negative reinforcement is widely