In order for it to count as Simpsons paradox I think there would need to be a confounding variable. It's certainly possible for it to appear spuriously, and for

In order for it to count as Simpsons paradox I think there would need to be a confounding variable. It's certainly possible for it to appear spuriously, and for something to look like a confounder when it isn't, but there would need to be some type of subgroup.