Learn Before
Case Study

Analyze the researcher's conclusion. Identify the logical errors in this causal claim by reference to the specific limitations of partial correlation.

Case context: A researcher investigates the relationship between mindfulness practice and stress levels. To rule out a potential confound, the researcher uses partial correlation to statistically control for exercise frequency. Finding a significant partial correlation (r=.34r = -.34), the researcher publishes a report stating: 'Statistically controlling for exercise proves that mindfulness practice directly causes a reduction in stress levels.'

Question: Analyze the researcher's conclusion. Identify the logical errors in this causal claim by reference to the specific limitations of partial correlation.

Sample answer: The researcher's causal claim is logically flawed. Although the researcher controlled for exercise frequency, partial correlation does not allow for definitive causal conclusions. First, the technique does not resolve the directionality problem, meaning that lower stress levels could actually cause an increase in mindfulness practice. Second, there may be other unmeasured third variables driving the relationship—such as academic workload or social support—that the researcher did not consider and statistically control.

Key points:

  • Diagnosing the incorrect causal claim.
  • Analyzing the directionality problem in the context of the case.
  • Identifying the presence of other unmeasured third variables.

Rubric:

  1. Student identifies that partial correlation cannot establish a definitive causal link. 2. Student analyzes the directionality problem within the context of mindfulness and stress. 3. Student identifies that other unmeasured third variables are not accounted for by controlling only exercise.

0

1

Updated 2026-05-27

Contributors are:

Who are from:

Tags

KPU

Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU

Related