Scottish researchers compared rates of depression between 94 undergraduates who regularly kept diaries and 41 students who did not. They found that people who kept diaries were more likely to have depression than those who did not. The researchers said, "We expecte diary-keepers to have some benefit, or be he same, but they were the worst off. You are probably much better if you don't write anything at all." Why is this an incorrect interpretation of these results?

Another explanation could be that people who are depressed are more likely to keep a diary.

This is an observational study, so it is not possible to ascribe that writing in a diary (cause) leads to depression (effect).

Their interpretation of the results was flawed because the researchers assumed an order of cause and effect.

Step-by-step explanation:

the answer is 0.3175 hope that you ^w^

also you might actually want to put this picture up if you want people to solve it luckily i remember this question

ƒ = 0.03b

hope this ( :

step-by-step explanation: