Final answer:
A sociologist mistakenly assuming that education alone causes high income without considering family income's effect on education is overlooking 'reverse causality'. Other crucial factors include socioeconomic background and familial influences that impact both education and income.
Step-by-step explanation:
If a sociologist assumes that the amount of education people receive directly causes them to earn a certain income, without considering that a family's income might also determine educational attainment, he is forgetting to consider reverse causality. This term refers to a situation where it is possible that the supposed effect might very well be the cause. For instance, while higher education may lead to higher income, it is also possible that those from wealthier families are able to attain better education due to their financial resources, thus affecting the sociologist's study on the relationship between education and income.
In addition to reverse causality, other important factors should not be overlooked, such as socioeconomic factors, which play a significant role in both educational attainment and income levels. These include the availability of resources, family support, and access to quality education, all of which can influence a person's career and income potential. Moreover, familial influences can also have a substantial impact on a student's educational path and future income prospects.
Thus, it's inadequate to view the relationship between education and income as a simple cause-and-effect without considering other influencing factors, such as reverse causality, socioeconomic background, and family environment that may also play a critical role.