Abstract
Abstract Although it is often true that the association between two variables may be due to some unobserved third variable, the plausiblity of such arguments needs careful examination. In 1987, a Canadian court accepted an explanation offered by the National Revenue Service of Canada that, in a test for promotion, lower pass rates among women than among men were explained by differences in rates of college attendance, a variable that was not directly observed by the court. We show that this explanation is not merely implausible. It is impossible. We conclude with a brief discussion of the role of a statistician in an argument involving an unobserved variable.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
