The correlation remains the same.
NO. correlation just (implies) a relationship ... for example, both may be caused by the same thing.
It mean that there is no correlation between the two variables. The variables are the same.
Absolutely not. The simplest way to demonstrate this is to consider a measure of agreement - disagreement. If we scored it so that "strongly agree" is 5 and "strongly disagree" is 1, we would get one value of the correlation. If we reverse-scored it, we would get exactly the same value, but with the opposite sign. The strength of the correlation is the same, but the direction of the relation has switched. Another consideration is the fact that the actual strength of the correlation is based on the square of its value. 0.20 squared is 0.04; 0.40 squared is 0.16. A correlation of 0.40 is four times as strong as a correlation of 0.20. But when you square something, you automatically lose the sign. The square of a negative number is positive. So by definition, correlations of the same size but different signs are equal in strength.
My understanding is, nothing changes. The correlation will be the same regardless of what units are used. Others may have a deeper level of understanding and suggest something else.
The correlation remains the same.
A cause implies a direct relationship between two factors where one factor results in the other. Correlation, on the other hand, refers to a relationship where two factors are observed to change together but may not have a direct cause-and-effect link. Correlation does not imply causation.
NO. correlation just (implies) a relationship ... for example, both may be caused by the same thing.
No. The effect is what happens as a result of something . For instance if you run a stop sign (result) the effect can be an accident. Think cause and effect.
When you have a scatter graph and you want to find the correlation of it, you draw a line from one corner to the other of the grid.Also, if the categories are to do with the same thing, then it's a positive correlation.
No.
There is no line that shows the correlation between two data sets. The correlation is a variable that ranges between -1 and +1.You may be thinking about regression which, although related, is not the same thing.There is no line that shows the correlation between two data sets. The correlation is a variable that ranges between -1 and +1.You may be thinking about regression which, although related, is not the same thing.There is no line that shows the correlation between two data sets. The correlation is a variable that ranges between -1 and +1.You may be thinking about regression which, although related, is not the same thing.There is no line that shows the correlation between two data sets. The correlation is a variable that ranges between -1 and +1.You may be thinking about regression which, although related, is not the same thing.
I THINK THE ANSWER IS YOU CAN USE CAUSE AND EFFECT IN YOUR HYPOTHSIS BECAUSE CAUSE IS SOMETHING AND SOMETHING AND SAME WITH EFFECT
No, stimulus is the cause and response is the effect. In feeding an animal, giving it food is the stimulus and it eating the food is the response.
I'm trying to find out the same thing. There is no listing for insomnia on the side effect list but I have had insomnia since I started Enbrel.
Correlation is an observation that two things happen at the same time (or happen in sequence). For example, you might observe that your neighbor Alphonse reads a newspaper and then goes to sleep. If this is a pattern that you have observed consistently, then the next time you observe Alphonse reading his newspaper, you can safely predict that he will then go to sleep. However, you do not know if reading a newspaper is what causes him to go to sleep. Possibly he would go to sleep at that time anyway, even if he did not have a newspaper. You have not established a cause and effect relationship.
Yes, they are the same.