Question

A particular institution rates nations on a ten-point scale, on the basis of political corruption (where a 10 rating reflects rampant corruption). A researcher finds a −0.8 correlation between this corruption index and per-capita income. On the basis of this evidence, a policy maker who wishes to raise per-capita income decides to apply his efforts toward reducing corruption.

Give one reason why the evidence described might not actually warrant the policy maker’s efforts?

Answer 1

Please read the answer in full. The reason and an an example have been provided below:

One reason why eveidence described might not actually warrant the policy maker' efforts is:

Concept: Correlation doesn't mean causation.

In the question' context it means that " reducing corruption will not increase the per-capita-income".

this is because correlation doesn't cause causation. in fact, the relationship can also be reverse

Eg. The opposite relation/causation can also be true- the income per capita were increased by raising salaries , therefore people were earning more which led them to not ask for bribes ( Reducing corruption)