Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Is everyday causation deterministic or probabilistic?|
|Authors:||Frosch, Caren A.|
Johnson-Laird, P. N.
|Citation:||Acta Psychologica, 137 (2011) 280–291|
|Abstract:||One view of causation is deterministic: A causes B means that whenever A occurs, B occurs. An alternative view is that causation is probabilistic: the assertion means that given A, the probability of B is greater than some criterion, such as the probability of B given not-A. Evidence about the induction of causal relations cannot readily decide between these alternative accounts, and so we examined how people refute causal assertions. In four experiments most participants judged that a single counterexample of A and not-B refuted assertions of the form, A causes B. And, as a deterministic theory based on mental models predicted, participants were more likely to request multiple refutations for assertions of the form, A enables B. Similarly, refutations of the form not-A and B were more frequent for enabling than causal assertions. Causation in daily life seems to be a deterministic concept.|
|Rights:||© 2011. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/|
|Description:||PsychINFO code: 2340 Cognitive Processes|
|Appears in Collections:||Published Articles, School of Psychology|
Files in This Item:
|Frosch_J-L_20_12_10.pdf||Post-review (final submitted)||428.4 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
Items in LRA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.