Correlation alone does not establish causation.
Two things moving together does not show that one caused the other.
Show me why
An association may reflect a causal effect, a common cause, reverse direction or coincidence. Imagine umbrella use and wet roads rising together: rain can explain both without umbrellas causing the roads to get wet.
A common misconception
The principle does not mean that causal relationships cannot be studied.
Where the limits are
Correlation can contribute useful evidence. The word “alone” matters.
How we know
The umbrella example is an illustration of a possible common cause, not a new empirical study. To infer causation, researchers need additional design, assumptions and evidence, such as interventions, timing, mechanisms and checks for confounding.
What would change this conclusion?
A specific association can support a causal conclusion when additional evidence and defensible assumptions identify the direction and rule out alternatives.
Sources you can inspect
- OpenStax / Rice University13.1 The Correlation Coefficient r — Introductory Business Statistics 2e
Explains why association is not sufficient for causation.
Publication date not stated · Checked in initial research 2026-10-08
Links were located in source research. Some publishers restrict automated access. Source presence is not institutional endorsement. Our citation standard
Share the evidence.
The QR opens this exact evidence page. The evidence page is publicly accessible. The printed domain is reserved for a future domain connection.
A respectful reply
Composed from this entry’s text. No AI calls or new factual verdicts.
Revision history
- Initial AI-assisted source research and scoped explanation. Awaiting owner editorial approval; not publicly verified.
- Owner explicitly approved all content as created for public publication. Statements, sources and evidence classifications unchanged.