From covariation to causation: a test of the assumption of causal power.
نویسندگان
چکیده
How humans infer causation from covariation has been the subject of a vigorous debate, most recently between the computational causal power account (P. W. Cheng, 1997) and associative learning theorists (e.g., K. Lober & D. R. Shanks, 2000). Whereas most researchers in the subject area agree that causal power as computed by the power PC theory offers a normative account of the inductive process. Lober and Shanks, among others, have questioned the empirical validity of the theory. This article offers a full report and additional analyses of the original study featured in Lober and Shanks's critique (M. J. Buehner & P. W. Cheng, 1997) and reports tests of Lober and Shanks's and other explanations of the pattern of causal judgments. Deviations from normativity, including the outcome-density bias, were found to be misperceptions of the input or other artifacts of the experimental procedures rather than inherent to the process of causal induction.
منابع مشابه
From Covariation to Causation: A Causal Power Theory
Because causal relations are neither observable nor deducible, they must be induced from observable events. The 2 dominant approaches to the psychology of causal induction—the covariation approach and the causal power approach—are each crippled by fundamental problems. This article proposes an integration of these approaches thai overcomes these problems. The proposal is that reasoners innately...
متن کاملInterpreting Covariation in Causal Structure Learning
Recent studies have shown that people use covariation information to infer causal structure. However, there is little information about how people derive causal directionality from covariation. The present study is designed to provide further evidence about the role of covariation in causal structure learning. In Experiment 1, where covariation between two variables was systematically manipulat...
متن کاملAssessing interactive causal influence.
The discovery of conjunctive causes--factors that act in concert to produce or prevent an effect--has been explained by purely covariational theories. Such theories assume that concomitant variations in observable events directly license causal inferences, without postulating the existence of unobservable causal relations. This article discusses problems with these theories, proposes a causal-p...
متن کاملThe Supposed Competition between Theories of Human Causal Inference
Newsome ((2003). The debate between current versions of covariation and mechanism approaches to causal inference. Philosophical Psychology, 16, 87–107.) recently published a critical review of psychological theories of human causal inference. In that review, he characterized covariation and mechanism theories, the two dominant theory types, as competing, and offered possible ways to integrate t...
متن کاملObservations vs. Interventions in Causal Induction: Heuristics in the Discrete and Continuous Paradigm Experiments
A descriptive model for covariation detection, the dual factor heuristic (DFH), has been proposed. While observation based covariation detection is an important initial stage of causal induction, intervention is indispensable to identify genuine causal links. An experiment examined DFH’s descriptive power in an environment where people manipulate causal events. DFH fit the data of the intervent...
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:
- Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition
دوره 29 6 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2003