Assertion (A): When there is an evidence of a linear relationship between two variables, it may not always mean an independent-dependent relationship between the two variables. Reason (R): The casual relationship between the two variables may not imply a reasonable theoretical relationship between the two.

The correct answer is: Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).

• Assertion (A) is true because correlation does not imply causation. Just because two variables are correlated does not mean that one causes the other. For example, there is a correlation between ice cream sales and shark attacks. However, this does not mean that eating ice cream causes shark attacks. It is more likely that both ice cream sales and shark attacks are caused by a third variable, such as hot weather.
• Reason (R) is also true, but it is not the correct explanation of (A). The casual relationship between two variables may not imply a reasonable theoretical relationship between the two, but this is not the reason why correlation does not imply causation. Correlation does not imply causation because there are many other possible explanations for the observed correlation.

For example, let’s say that you observe that there is a correlation between the number of hours that students study and their grades. This does not mean that studying causes good grades. It is more likely that there is a third variable that is causing both of these things, such as intelligence. Intelligent students are more likely to study hard and to get good grades.

In conclusion, both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).