Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumCorrelation vs. Causation

An urban development commission observed that neighborhoods in the city with the highest density of coffee shops also experienced the most significant increases in residential property values over the last decade. Based on this observation, the commission concluded that the presence of coffee shops directly drives up local property values.

Which of the following statements, if true, would provide a valid alternative explanation for the observed correlation, thereby weakening the commission's conclusion? (Select all that apply)

  1. Increases in property values attract wealthier demographics, creating a lucrative market that prompts entrepreneurs to open new coffee shops.Answer
  2. City-led initiatives to improve street lighting and safety simultaneously make neighborhoods more attractive to homebuyers and encourage new retail businesses, including coffee shops, to open.Answer
  3. C
    In neighborhoods where local zoning laws strictly prohibited the opening of new coffee shops, residential property values remained completely stagnant over the same decade.
  4. D
    Coffee shops in these fast-growing neighborhoods frequently source their coffee beans from expensive, premium international suppliers.
  5. E
    A subsequent independent audit of the commission's data revealed that there was actually no statistical correlation between coffee shop density and property value increases.

Answer

The correct choices are those providing alternative explanations: reverse causation (rising property values cause coffee shops to open) and a third variable (city improvements cause both).
The correct answers successfully weaken the argument's causal conclusion by providing valid alternative ways to interpret the observed correlation. One correct answer demonstrates reverse causation, suggesting the effect (rising property values) actually produced the presumed cause (more coffee shops). The other correct answer identifies a third variable (city improvements) that independently caused both phenomena at the same time.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's premise and conclusion.
Premise: A correlation exists between high coffee shop density and significant property value increases. Conclusion: Coffee shops directly cause property values to rise.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to evaluate the logical leap from the premise to the conclusion.
2
Determine the logical flaw in the argument.
The argument assumes causation based solely on a correlation, completely ignoring other possible explanations for why the two factors appear together.
Identifying the central flaw helps predict what type of information would successfully weaken the conclusion.
3
Evaluate the answer choices against the predicted alternative explanations.
One correct option shows reverse causation, while another introduces a common third cause. The incorrect options strengthen the argument, provide irrelevant information, or improperly contradict the established premises.
To accurately select all applicable statements that properly weaken the causal claim.

Key Concept

Correlation does not imply causation. A correlation can often be explained by reverse causation, a third variable (common cause), or coincidence.
Rate this question

Topics

Correlation vs. Causation

More questions from this topic