Which of John Stuart Mill's three rules for causality can be assessed using a correlational research design? Which of the three rules cannot be assessed with this type of design?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer is John Stuart Mill, a British philosopher and political economist, proposed a set of methods for determining causal relationships, which are often referred to as Mill's Methods. Among these, three are particularly relevant to the question of causality:

1. The Method of Agreement: This rule states that if two or more instances of a phenomenon under investigation have only one circumstance in common, the circumstance in which alone all the instances agree is the cause (or effect) of the given phenomenon.

2. The Method of Difference: According to this rule, if an instance in which the phenomenon under investigation occurs, and an instance in which it does not occur, have every circumstance in common save one, that one occurring only in the former; the circumstance in which alone the two instances differ is the effect, or the cause, or an indispensable part of the cause, of the phenomenon.

3. The Joint Method of Agreement and Difference: This combines the first two methods. It suggests that if two or more instances in which the phenomenon occurs have only one circumstance in common, while two or more instances in which it does not occur have nothing in common save the absence of that circumstance, then the circumstance in which alone the first set of instances agree is the cause (or effect) of the given phenomenon.

A correlational research design can assess the presence of a relationship between two variables, but it cannot establish causation definitively. Here's how Mill's rules relate to correlational research:

- The Method of Agreement can be partially assessed using a correlational design, as it can show that a particular factor is present whenever a certain outcome is observed. However, correlation does not rule out the possibility of other common factors that are not measured, so it does not fully satisfy the method.

- The Method of Difference cannot be assessed using a correlational design because this method requires manipulation of the presence or absence of the potential causal factor to observe the corresponding effect on the outcome. Correlational studies do not involve such manipulation and therefore cannot establish a cause-and-effect relationship.

- The Joint Method of Agreement and Difference also cannot be assessed with a correlational design for the same reason as the Method of Difference. It requires the ability to compare instances with and without the phenomenon, with controlled manipulation of variables, which is not possible in correlational research.

In summary, while correlational research can suggest potential associations that might be causal, it cannot confirm causality because it does not involve manipulation of variables or control over other influencing factors. Experimental designs, where variables are manipulated and controlled, are required to fully assess and establish causation according to Mill's rules.

Which of John Stuart Mill's Three Rules for Causality Can