Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumCorrelation vs. Causation

An organizational psychologist studied 50 technology firms over a five-year period. She found a strong statistical correlation between the frequency of company-sponsored social events and the overall productivity of the employees. Based on this, the psychologist recommended that firms struggling with low productivity should immediately increase their budget for social events, concluding that attending these events causes employees to work more efficiently.

The psychologist's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it

  1. A
    presumes, without providing justification, that what is true of the technology firms as a whole is true of each individual employee within those firms
  2. B
    confuses a condition that is sufficient to produce high employee productivity with a condition that is necessary to produce it
  3. fails to consider the possibility that a company's high productivity provides the financial resources and morale necessary to host frequent social eventsAnswer
  4. D
    fails to distinguish between the main conclusion regarding the need to increase event budgets and a subsidiary conclusion regarding employee efficiency
  5. E
    illogically concludes that a larger percentage of social event attendance equates to a larger absolute number of highly productive workers

Answer

The argument is flawed because it ignores the possibility of reverse causation—that being highly productive causes the firm to host more social events, rather than the social events causing the productivity.
The correct option identifies the classic flaw of assuming causation from correlation. Specifically, it points out the possibility of reverse causality: instead of social events causing high productivity, the high productivity (and resulting financial success) might be the actual cause that allows the firm to afford frequent social events.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structure of the argument.
Premise: There is a statistical correlation between social events and productivity. Conclusion: Social events cause employees to work more efficiently.
Identifying the premises and conclusion is essential to evaluating the logical gap in the reasoning.
2
Identify the logical flaw.
The argument jumps from a mere statistical correlation to a definitive causal relationship.
When a conclusion asserts a causal relationship based only on correlated phenomena, it commits a causal reasoning fallacy.
3
Evaluate the answer choices based on the identified flaw.
The correct answer must describe a failure to consider alternative explanations for the correlation, such as reverse causality or a third variable.
The correct answer in a 'Flaw in the Reasoning' question accurately describes the logical error made in the stimulus.

Key Concept

Correlation vs. Causation
Rate this question

Topics

Correlation vs. Causation

More questions from this topic