"Correlation does not equal causation" was my old stats teacher's favourite phrase along with "always interpolate, never extrapolate." :)
@xsaberfaye6 жыл бұрын
Extrapolation is actually necessary in certain circumstances though - for example predicting growth of global human population, economic forecasts, environmental forecasts regarding climate change.... anything that has to do with the future.
@Unordung6 жыл бұрын
Post hoc ergo propter hoc!
@SilortheBlade6 жыл бұрын
Bah. I know my rock keeps away tigers because I have never seen a tiger for as long as I have had it.
@Tuckems6 жыл бұрын
SilortheBlade Makes sense to me
@Pfhorrest6 жыл бұрын
Nicholas Cage movies are correlated by yet another unmentioned variable: summer. Nicholas Cage is an action movie star. Action movies are generally targeted for summer releases. Summer is also hot, which is the cause behind air conditioner sales and swimming, the latter of which is of course the cause of drowning.
@aido926 жыл бұрын
Pfhorrest Or it could be that people who have endured a Nicholas Cage movie are more likely to drown themselves ...
@polyjohn34256 жыл бұрын
That's true, but the data shows a close correlation over multiple years, not just over the seasons of a given year. It just so happens that the summers of years with more Nicholas Cage movies also happen to have more drownings.
@qilinxue9896 жыл бұрын
*Me:* I used to think correlation implied causation. *Me:* Then I watched this video. Now I don't. *Friend:* Sounds like the video helped. *Me:* Well, Maybe.
@polyjohn34256 жыл бұрын
lol. Well, probably.
@jedisentinel48796 жыл бұрын
The video explains that it's not because two elements are correlated that one is the cause of the other. One '''can''' be the cause, but it's not logical to imply it just from their correlation. It was not the floor itself that broke the glass even though it is related to the breaking, it was it's impact with the glass, '''caused''' by gravity.
@verdatum6 жыл бұрын
XKCD is a pretty good comic :)
@HerodotusVon6 жыл бұрын
Kachimbo somebody missed the joke
@noobnoobyify6 жыл бұрын
Herodotus Von 8428 no, someone got the joke, but felt the need to expand our knowledge.
@murphygreen84846 жыл бұрын
This has been my favorite CrashCourse season by far. Really enjoying the material and the host!
@laterkater42136 жыл бұрын
Better explanation then my university level stats class. 👍
@aude19796 жыл бұрын
A class on non linear relationships would be FANTASTIC :) And more classes in general (e.g., on general versus mixed effects models; GAMs etc...) Thank you for your dynamism!
@BlackCatGodess6 жыл бұрын
Puppy cat! I didn't know that they'd made a stuffed animal of him. This has greatly improved my day.
@Deedj16 жыл бұрын
Everyone needs to see this! Just because things seem connected on the surface doesn’t mean they’re related and Visa Versa!
@josephyml6 жыл бұрын
psst. its vice versa, not visa versa
@legalfictionnaturalfact39696 жыл бұрын
and if they're not connected then they DON'T CORRELATE. this shit's a red herring.
@legalfictionnaturalfact39695 жыл бұрын
@@improover113 talking specifically about causal relationships, as the phrase states explicitly
@mielthebee Жыл бұрын
"..if people blink more when they're lying!" Our Professor: 😳
@earth2ellie5 жыл бұрын
“Mr. Fluffy misses you.” *pouts thinking of the cat I don’t have missing me*
@jesusosegueda4226 жыл бұрын
Crash Course, thank you so much. This awesome course is definitively above the curve!
@greyareaRK16 жыл бұрын
I haven't watched Nicholas Cage movies, AND I haven't drowned. Aha!
@JackieChenpi6 жыл бұрын
Watching Stat for fun again.
@aaronmarks93665 жыл бұрын
I wish all my scatterplots ended up making pictures of dinosaurs.
@akankshaandadityasingh98886 жыл бұрын
When she apologises for using imperial units......
@davidsweeney1116 жыл бұрын
This needs to be essential viewing for EVERYONE.
@aaronmarks93665 жыл бұрын
"Air Cons, and Con Airs" Amazing
@KASSISHOT6 жыл бұрын
Every time I see one of these videos I look at the view count and know that there's that many more people out there that are better educated about this topic and that makes me very optimistic for the future keep up the great work guys
@ramseszeeman4076 Жыл бұрын
without you guys i would not pass my exams thank you so much
@wenhong58525 жыл бұрын
Watching this video at work, miss my cat. Burst into tears
@easysnake2056 жыл бұрын
I feel some people go so far in this argument that they seem to argue the correlation disproves causation. Eg. "thats only correlation it doesnt prove causation, obviously you are wrong" Yes correlation doesnt prove causation, but it most definitely does not disprove causation. Further it might suggest causation, or that a 3rd factor is causing both phenomena to occur. Its frustrating to give data in an argument, to have the other side counter with, "thats only correlation, it doesn't prove causation, you are wrong."
@patrickanderson19936 жыл бұрын
EasySnake 100% agree
@ShaudaySmith6 жыл бұрын
i've seen this too! It irks me to no end.
@rosettahyatte80105 жыл бұрын
This is crash course statistics and statistics is all about probability?
@lovepeople9516 жыл бұрын
Thank u Crash Course
@HalloikbenJim6 жыл бұрын
Islam xDDDD
@flippersnyder6 жыл бұрын
So this was great. You are definetly one of my favorite crash course hosts. And I took statistics back in 1994. I have one question that boggles me. When and who is right, who determines the reality or that there is causation? Example .... cigarette smoking and lung health. The negative effects are clearly visible, the correlation is there ... but is it really the cause? When and how do we get to a positive causality? Or is it left to the interpreter? Or is it just all relative? Or by the end of the day it's meaningless and everyone can make the statement "correlation doesn't equal causality" and your data and beautiful charts and correlations just fizzle out?
@24680kong6 жыл бұрын
That's the tricky part! Ultimately they all need to be interpreted. Overall, there is no true "proof", just higher levels of confidence. I am confident that the city of Paris exists, even though I've never been there. The process generally starts by asking "is this even possible?" and "Does this make some sense?" Then you can go back and try to find some other cause of the data you got. Eventually, you have to do experiments carefully. But even well-planned experiments can have hickups and biases (there have been many cases of seemingly high-confidence experiments not being repeatable by other professionals). Often, multiple experimenters need to come up with the same results on their own (and usually with their own equipment) before the scientific community is convinced. Overall, it's a difficult and time consuming process.
@sammyinengland6 жыл бұрын
In health data like the lung example, there is a set of criteria called the Bradford-Hill criteria. Google it. This is criteria for determining if something can be considered causation. It is not a checklist: you still need to do your own scientific interpretation. But it’s a good way to get an idea of whether the data your looking at implies causation or not. The criteria are: effect size, consistency, specificity, temporality, biological plausibility, dose-response relationship, coherence, analogous results. Interestingly, Bradford Hill who came up with this list, is the same Hill who co-authored the original Doll and Hill paper that established the linked between smoking and lung cancer!
@txt35675 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much for sharing. You're so much better at explaining than my professor.
@thegodofalldragons6 жыл бұрын
I've seen people both conflate correlation with causation in situations that are clearly coincidence and insist that correlation does not equal causation when the pattern of cause and effect are obvious.
@UnknownRefrigerator6 жыл бұрын
I love this series! However, you made one, small lie: R^2 does not have to be between zero and one, but can in fact be negative. You spoke of the mx + b, but failed to mention what value it has to determine b (and if chose horribly wrong, it can give you negative R-values, due to estimate a model that is worse than random). Keep up the series! :)
@mishadonchenko43626 жыл бұрын
Squares of real numbers are always nonnegative, by definition. They can never be less than zero -- the square of -5 is 25, for example.
@rkpetry6 жыл бұрын
...how do you fit a regression line through a circle (or fat ellipse) on a 2D-scattered, plot... ...how do you define accuracy where there are fewer data points, even though the fitted-curve looks similar, (do you overlay random information certitude measure sigma bars)... *_...(in case you missed the first question: flip the plot axes for a different regression line...)_*
@user-hb2rt7ek8x6 жыл бұрын
Как же замечательно вы рассказываете! Даже переводить ничего не надо! (Russian is deliberate here)
@GameOver321 Жыл бұрын
wow! Thank you
@elijahsassercollins36855 жыл бұрын
now go teach the media this so they can stop blaming video games for all the worlds problems
@ElforTheLandstander6 жыл бұрын
This was the funniest Crash Course video I've ever seen. Her comedic timing is excellent. Though I still don't know if that clever mayor was a man or a woman.
@MakeMeThinkAgain6 жыл бұрын
I was TRICKED into watching this by the title. How hard would it be to add, "WARNING! THIS IS STATISTICS, DWEEB" to what appears on my temptation screen? It was really good.
@ternvall6 жыл бұрын
y = mx + b , is this some American standard? In Sweden it's y=kx+m
@HeinerS6 жыл бұрын
It doesn't really matter either way. The general consensus is that the last letters from the latin alphabet, i.e. x, y and z are being used as placeholderds for unknown quantities, whereas letters from the beginning (e.g. a, b and c) or middle (e.g. k, l, m and n) are being used as placeholders for known quantities (to be supplied or deduced when doing a specific example). The placeholders for know quantities may be different in different countries for many reasons (ease of pronounciation, legibility, tradition, etc.). Tradition usually also means that often the same equation uses different placeholders in math and physics. Example: in Math class the may use y = ax + b, in Physics class they may use y = mx + c, just because ... (and then of course in the kinetic equations this becomes e.g. v = at + v0 representing physical quantities).
@gymotc4 жыл бұрын
Excellent video! Thank you!!!
@xmems6 жыл бұрын
Love this upload 😍
@tvvt0052 ай бұрын
Just noticed puppycat on her table! 💗
@mariafranciscalopez36946 жыл бұрын
Me: focus, you have a test this week Also me: OMG PUPPYCAT!!
@verdatum6 жыл бұрын
Anecdotally, after playing Simpsons: Hit & Run (a GTA clone), I genuinely drove more recklessly for a little while. Not like I got into an accident, but like I was cutting corners tighter, and being a little heavier on the pedal. I had to work at it to knock it off. Really really good game though.
@kevinye10414 жыл бұрын
Squared correlation r^2 Line of regression Can anyone explain a little more in depth standard deviation? Im still not sure what information it tells us in a scatter plot
@hekmatullahrezai97434 жыл бұрын
I am also looking for that :/
@maruisaiahnapa73816 жыл бұрын
I was JUST reading up on this in class! 😂
@ginohobayan001 Жыл бұрын
Thank you!!! Learned so much from this video.
@h0rban6 жыл бұрын
You have mentioned that the steep line can have a strong correlation but there was no support of the graphics. Emphasis for users: the slope and correlation are different
@teen-at-heart6 жыл бұрын
Good episode, but some things would need exercise and ‘usage’ in order to be memorized well and longer-term, like r and r squared.
@luminias.upscmentor6 жыл бұрын
Gain in my knowledge is perfectly correlated with the number of crash course videos I watch and shows the value of absolute +1 as the correlation coefficient #CrashCourse ..... 😁😁😁
@SangoProductions2136 жыл бұрын
Correlation does not neccesarily state that causation is found between two variable. However. don't walk away thinking correlation disproves causation. This isn't politics. There are more than two possibilities. (There are in politics too, but ignore that.) Thanks, and have a good day. As a final note: Time taken to get from point a to point b is negatively correlated with speed. There is (by definition no less) causation there.
@verdatum6 жыл бұрын
Sango, that's a good tip. But I fear that addressing people as the "scientifically illiterate" might not be the best way to get your message across. (What I would give for Crash Course: Rhetoric).
@SangoProductions2136 жыл бұрын
Everyone was illiterate (scientific and otherwise) at one point. It is one's duty to make sure they do not continue to be.
@xsaberfaye6 жыл бұрын
There is no causation only chaos.
@verdatum6 жыл бұрын
It is absolutely true that everyone begins illiterate, and there should be no shame in that. However, referring to people as such can cause them to misinterpret your message as being condescending, even though you had no intention to be that way. Regardless, they are now slighted, and in retaliation, they ignore your advice, no matter how reasonable it was.
@verdatum6 жыл бұрын
kaizersabre, there is no Dana, only ZOOL.
@MrGustaphe6 жыл бұрын
The example of changing the units on the y-axis is only relevant if you're not doing your dimensional analysis properly. If the slope of the feet-feet plot is 0.5, then the slope of the meter-feet plot is 0.15m/foot=0.5
@childfs68656 жыл бұрын
Comment containing the word EVERYONE in caps lock.
@abilashsuresh43796 жыл бұрын
Child Fs but why
@jasonsanders87976 жыл бұрын
Ok, you talked me into it.
@lincolnpepper8164 жыл бұрын
containing the word EVERYONE in caps lock
@PatrickMichaelOLeary5 жыл бұрын
At 0:27, it must have taken everything you had to not blink.
@ibnufajar87336 жыл бұрын
does the "r²=0.7" mean that we could predict accurately by 70% ?
@elijahsassercollins36855 жыл бұрын
yes
@yetigriff6 жыл бұрын
That's not the graph Jim Carrey and Jenny McCarthy showed me.
@maddijackson1346 жыл бұрын
Please do more literature!!
@user-ic6gv2ih3t5 жыл бұрын
很棒的视频, 对学习统计学非常有帮助
@daniels42096 жыл бұрын
Thank You.
@diamoniqueallen22315 жыл бұрын
The Bee and Puppy-cat doll in the back is sooo cute (๑>◡
@youknuckle6 жыл бұрын
Love this video and the channel, also - @1:43 You've spelled eruptions wrong...
@archiegent13576 жыл бұрын
Y = mx + b?i thought it was c
@ultimaterex6 жыл бұрын
Phony Aardvark i learned it as y= ax+b
@verdatum6 жыл бұрын
Bryan, what does m stand for? The mmmslope? (I actually don't know the answer, now that I think about it)
@verdatum6 жыл бұрын
O_O *head-explosion*
@Samantha22096 жыл бұрын
I know it was c (at least in my part of the world)
@verdatum6 жыл бұрын
"mx + c" is also reasonable in the sense that "c" is often used to refer to some "constant". This is also the explanation for e=mc^2. Because the speed of light in a vacuum is a constant.
@tvit6 жыл бұрын
Those movie computer tick noises (when charts are presented) drive me mad, and I don't even have EQ in my setup to damp them down. Good vid though!
@MrCanada4evr5 жыл бұрын
Cool-Cage Act; hilarious.
@AdamShaiken6 жыл бұрын
This was very interesting...though, I wonder, just how significant it is ? Can you give me a chi squared on that ?
@renovationgaming54386 жыл бұрын
The first eruption scatter plot has a typo
@HrishikeshPalande4 жыл бұрын
We don't predict the temperature in Fahrenheit we calculate it using the formula (c*9/5)+32
@malteeaser1014 жыл бұрын
If A caused B then there is a correlation between A and B. The rising of the Sun caused the eating of an ice cream by John. Therefore, there is a correlation between the rising of the Sun and the eating of an ice cream by John. My question is, how would you quantify those events and plot the correlation between them on a graph? Would I count the number of times these events occurred? What if an event only causes another once? What if John died after the first ice cream? Can we still say that there was a correlation?
@MaureenMurphy_6 жыл бұрын
Thank you for thissss!!
@hem891806 жыл бұрын
Love the series!!!
@comareja46 жыл бұрын
Its was hillarious ,the data present by the reporter.
@xionpentagast6 жыл бұрын
Loved it!
@amohamoud39926 жыл бұрын
While taking my stats course I started sleep talking and explained empirical rule to my mon
@rkpetry6 жыл бұрын
*_...there'd be a negative-correlation where reducing air conditioning increases swimming..._* *_...or, an overriding 'cause' leading to watching-speeding or doing-it, another, negrelation..._* *_...so...what's the mathematically-concisely-stated-statistical-rule for causality-guessing..._* *_...(making statistics, like modulo arithmetic: where compounded moduli may get better)..._*
@darrenreuben42226 жыл бұрын
this was an awesome video
@omarkhalaf70144 жыл бұрын
Wait... Technically everything is connected. Maybe the relationship between 2 variables are correlated even tho it doesn't make sense that they cause each other, but that happens because these 2 variables are connected to other variables that we didn't observe yet these variables can indirectly influence the relationship between the main 2 variables we are comparing. So I guess that means, one way or another, correlation DOES imply causation. Error 404
@Angelusloco155 жыл бұрын
EXCELLENT!
@AnanthaSKrishnan5 жыл бұрын
@crash course team, not all the graphs in the datasaurus dozen shown in the end doesn't seems like having same correlation coefficient. Few look like having r=1, few r=0. Please correct me if I'm wrong
@NataPal6 жыл бұрын
i love this
@ComedyCorner6196 жыл бұрын
Hello great video
@unacomn6 жыл бұрын
I don't know, Nic Cage may be dragging people to the deep after they see his movies. The evidence is there.
@ZoggFromBetelgeuse5 жыл бұрын
I watched this video without having seen the previous ones, and spent a considerable amount of time wondering "what the heck is an 'old faithful eruption' ?"
@ZoggFromBetelgeuse5 жыл бұрын
(For those who have the same problem: "Old Faithful" seems to be the name of a geyser. (I don't know where it is, but when an English KZfaq show refers to a location, person, event or sports ritual you have never heared of, you can be pretty sure it's in North America.)
@PatrickMichaelOLeary5 жыл бұрын
In Pearsons study, did he take into account that people often shrink as they get older?
@NaihanchinKempo6 жыл бұрын
wish you'd touch on poker. Math and Data is very important in poker
@nathanm45396 жыл бұрын
Yes. I am so sick of hearing people not know that correlation does not equal causation
@gamereditor59ner226 жыл бұрын
Great video!!!😊
@StKozlovsky4 жыл бұрын
3:12 > Hummer, the epitome of in-your-face Americanness > Russian license plate
@nickwilsonxc5 жыл бұрын
I’ll have you know that my cat, Mr. Whiskers, loves me.
@polarablues646 жыл бұрын
When it's hot, people with no A.C. tend to go to the movies. Movie theaters are usually quite air conditioned and you get to enjoy it for a couple of hours.
@badcookies308 Жыл бұрын
PuppyCattttt!!!! so cute
@twiggyvlogs64416 жыл бұрын
Any chance of crash course architecture (history of?)
@micanikko5 жыл бұрын
So no one's commenting how she's got a *puppycat plush toy* behind her?
@gregoryfenn14626 жыл бұрын
Can we do a talk on how you DO identify causation, not just rule out plausible causal relations? Or are we taking a Humean view of causation and saying there is no real force of causation at all, just a fixed regularity that humans imagine happens?
@CarlyDayDay6 жыл бұрын
I think it requires an experimental study
@bigpapi36366 жыл бұрын
The narrator is very easy to listen too. Even I understood the content
@danielmclaughlin55736 жыл бұрын
Mr. Fluffy does not miss me. Mr. Fluffy ran away...
@surajshahi49665 жыл бұрын
Beginning and end were in a circle.
@muhammadabdulhakeem7152 Жыл бұрын
i will like to confirm that is the equation of a line equals y=mx +b or y=mx+c
@DudeWhoSaysDeez6 жыл бұрын
Are regression lines ever parabolic? What would be some examples if so?
@dabomba19516 жыл бұрын
optimum angle for maximum range. Range in terms of angle would have a turning point around 45 degrees where it reaches its max range then goes back down. one example
@chelseaparlett80696 жыл бұрын
you can use a parabola to fit data. It would be polynomial regression where your x's are taken to various powers. Sometimes it's really useful to do so, since often data isn't perfectly linear.
@robertpalumbo90896 жыл бұрын
Wow this is my doctor and his funny science
@fame2011xoxo6 жыл бұрын
Does anyone know how to interpret a Bland-Altman analysis?
@xxtheswagger8xx2634 жыл бұрын
who is here for school
@redstone85136 жыл бұрын
1:20 They spelt eruptions wrong on the y-axis...
@bnt75264 жыл бұрын
I can't understand statistics. But the jokes on statistics in the comment section is even harder to understand lol.