Counterfactual Undoing in Deterministic Causal Reasoning
نویسندگان
چکیده
Pearl (2000) offers a formal framework for modeling causal and counterfactual reasoning. By virtue of the way it represents intervention on a causal system, the framework makes predictions about how people reason when asked counterfactual questions about causal relations. Four studies are reported that test the application of the framework to deterministic causal and conditional arguments. The results support the proposed representation of causal arguments, especially when the nature of the counterfactual intervention is made explicit. The results also show that conditional relations are construed in different ways.
منابع مشابه
Undoing Effect in Causal Reasoning 1 Do We " Do " ?
A normative framework for modeling causal and counterfactual reasoning has been proposed (Pearl, 2000; Spirtes, Glymour, & Scheines, 1993). The framework is general, covering both probabilistic and deterministic reasoning, and is built on the premise that reasoning from observation differs fundamentally from reasoning from intervention. Intervention includes actual (e.g., physical) manipulation...
متن کاملDo We "do"?
A normative framework for modeling causal and counterfactual reasoning has been proposed by Spirtes, Glymour, and Scheines (1993; cf. Pearl, 2000). The framework takes as fundamental that reasoning from observation and intervention differ. Intervention includes actual manipulation as well as counterfactual manipulation of a model via thought. To represent intervention, Pearl employed the do ope...
متن کاملExplanations of Counterfactual Inferences
When engaging in counterfactual thought, people must imagine changes to the actual state of the world. In this study, we investigated how people reason about counterfactual scenarios by asking participants to make counterfactual inferences about a series of causal devices (i.e., answer questions such as If component X had not operated [had failed], would components Y, Z, and W have operated?) a...
متن کاملCounterfactual Reasoning in Causal Judgments: Implications for Marketing
This article describes recent research on counterfactual reasoning in causal judgment and details implications for future research on consumer and managerial decisions. Two types of counterfactual reasoning may be employed in causal judgment, one of which involves outcome contrasts, and is used to generate possible causal explanations, and the other of which involves antecedent contrasts and is...
متن کاملThe Relationship between Causal and Counterfactual Reasoning
In this paper it is claimed that counterfactual reasoning in contextualized situations depends on and reflects causal contingencies, which are actualized depending on the task demand. The experiments presented manipulated some elements of the pragmatics of a task to show cases where dissociation between causal and counterfactual reasoning does or does not occur. Based on this evidence, it is cl...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2002