Questions: Question 25 1.5 pts Which of the following are 2 criteria needed for asserting causal claims? No plausible alternative explanations Zero correlation Third variable problem Time precedence

The answer is:

• No plausible alternative explanations
• Time precedence

Explanation for each option:

1. No plausible alternative explanations: This is correct. For a causal claim to be valid, it must be shown that there are no other plausible explanations for the observed relationship between the variables. This means ruling out other factors that could potentially cause the effect.

2. Zero correlation: This is incorrect. A zero correlation indicates no relationship between the variables, which would not support a causal claim. For a causal relationship, there must be some level of correlation between the variables.

3. Third variable problem: This is incorrect. The third variable problem refers to the possibility that an unmeasured variable is actually causing the observed relationship between the two variables of interest. Addressing this problem is important, but it is not a criterion for asserting a causal claim; rather, it is a potential issue that needs to be ruled out.

4. Time precedence: This is correct. For a causal claim, the cause must precede the effect in time. This means that the variable thought to be the cause must occur before the variable thought to be the effect.

In summary, the two criteria needed for asserting causal claims are "No plausible alternative explanations" and "Time precedence."