An observational study found that the amount of time a child spends learning a second language is associated with standardized t
esting performance. The correlation coefficient was found to be r = 0.94. A conclusion was made that the more time a child spends learning a second language, the better the child performs on standardized tests. Why is such a conclusion not correct? (2 points) The sample was not representative of the population.
The correlation value should be negative for such a conclusion.
The correlation value should equal 0 for such a conclusion.
Causation cannot be determined from an observational study.
The correlation value implies that less than 90% of the variability in standardized testing performance can be explained by learning a second language.
