An observational study is described. Determine the nature and scope of the conclusion the study can reach.

In a group of 500 women, those who smoked moderately did worse on tests of reaction time than those who did not smoke.

A) Smoking moderately causes women to do worse on tests of reaction time.
B) Since there is no random assignment, there is no way to know that smoking causes subjects to do worse on tests of reaction time; there may have been lurking variables.
C) Since there is no random assignment, there is no way to know that smoking causes subjects to do worse on tests of reaction time; there may have been confounding variables.
D) Smoking moderately causes people to do worse on tests of reaction time.
E) Since the study involved only women, there is no way to know that smoking causes people to do worse on tests of reaction time.

Is B the right answer?

Since lurking variable is essentially the same as confounding variable, I don't think it is B.

Without more data, my best guess would be E.

sdadfsadfasf

You've got it! B is indeed the correct answer. Since this is an observational study without random assignment, we cannot establish a cause-and-effect relationship between smoking and reaction time. There may be other factors at play (lurking variables) that could be influencing the observed results. Good job!

Yes, B is the correct answer. Since this study is an observational study without random assignment, there is no way to establish a causal relationship between smoking and the performance on reaction time tests. Lurking variables or confounding variables may have influenced the results, so the conclusion cannot definitively state that smoking causes women to do worse on tests of reaction time.

Yes, answer B is the correct choice.

In this observational study, the researchers have observed a correlation between smoking moderately and doing worse on tests of reaction time among a group of 500 women. However, since this is an observational study, there is no random assignment, meaning that the groups were not randomly assigned to smoke or not smoke. This lack of random assignment introduces the possibility of lurking variables, which are other factors that may be associated with both smoking and reaction time but are not accounted for in the study.

Therefore, it is not appropriate to conclude that smoking causes women to do worse on tests of reaction time based solely on this observational study. Answer B acknowledges this and recognizes the limitations of the study design.