factor-analytic
Correlation is when two things are related or have similar properties and they can exist independently. Causation means that one thing made the other thing happen.
The independent variable explains .32*100 percent of the variance in the dependent variable.This is 9%.The explainable variance is always the square of the correlation (r).
1.0
0.5
both are inter related. an Intellectual always have the creativity and viceversa So the in betwenn the range -1 to +1 ... my heart goes to +1
Correlation is when two things are related or have similar properties and they can exist independently. Causation means that one thing made the other thing happen.
The independent variable explains .32*100 percent of the variance in the dependent variable.This is 9%.The explainable variance is always the square of the correlation (r).
The branch of psychology that explains the underlying principles of human behavior is cognitive psychology. This field focuses on how individuals perceive, think, and solve problems, providing insights into the processes that govern our actions and decisions.
0.5
1.0
It is a special technique used to separate and identify DNA fragments.
Erosion moves sediment to new locations
A series of videos on youtube explains how to do this. Please see the link for the first video in the series.
He captures the imperfect, disorganized way that Anse thinks and feels :)
The standard answer is that a positive statistical correlation, no matter how strong, never proves anything about the causal relationship. Technically, correlations are symmetric and so the evidence is identical whether you imagine that A causes B or B causes A. Another problem is that you could have an omitted third factor C which explains both A and B. A correlation between A and B never rules out the possibility of C influencing them both. What you can sometimes say more realistically is that a strong correlation might make a proposed causal explanation more plausible. It might be evidence as part of an argument, but it's not sufficient by itself. Other parts of the argument could be exclusion of other factors (through experiments or statistical controls) and logical precedence. For example, if you had evidence that women are smarter than men, it doesn't seem likely that smartness causes gender. Similarly, events from the future don't influence events of the past; thus establishing the time sequence might also help to build a causal explanation. In short, there are few if any obvious causal relationships based on correlation alone if you want to use rigorous methods. Experiments and replication of results under diverse circumstances are the best way to show a causal relationship.
both are inter related. an Intellectual always have the creativity and viceversa So the in betwenn the range -1 to +1 ... my heart goes to +1
Quantum mechanics deals with things on the atomic and subatomic level. Statistical mechanics deals with large systems, on the order of 10^23 particles. So those are currently mutually exclusive areas of physics. That is not to say that one day that issue will be rectified, but as of current there is no overlap.AnswerI disagree. Statistical mechanics explains the connection between the very small and the not-so-small things. It explains large-scale properties, such as energy, temperature, pressure, current, etc. in terms of the movements of particles at an atomic scale. Statistical mechanics was first formulated in the 19th century, before quantum mechanics, and was built on classical mechanics; however, it has also been done for quantum mechanics.