Weighting of contingency information in causal judgement: Evidence of hypothesis dependence and use of a positive-test strategy

Contingency is an important cue to causation. Research shows that people unequally weight the cells of a 2 × 2 contingency table as follows: cause-present/effect-present (A) > cause-present/effect-absent (B) > cause-absent/effect-present (C) > cause-absent/effect-absent (D). Although some models of causal judgement can accommodate that fact, most of them assume that the weighting of information is invariant as a function of whether one is assessing a hypothesized generative versus preventive relationship. An experiment was conducted that tested the hypothesis-independence assumption against the predictions of a novel weighted-positive-test-strategy account, which predicts hypothesis dependence in cell weighting. Supporting that account, judgements of hypothesized generative causes showed the standard A > B > C > D inequality, but judgements of hypothesized preventive causes showed the predicted B > A > D > C inequality. The findings reveal that cell weighting in causal judgement is both unequal and hypothesis dependent.

[1]  S. Tipper,et al.  Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 1948, Nature.

[2]  P. White.  Causal judgment from contingency information: A systematic test of thepCI rule , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[3]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Structure and strength in causal induction , 2005, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  Denise Dellarosa Cummins,et al.  Naive theories and causal deduction , 1995, Memory & cognition.

[5]  Denis J. Hilton,et al.  Judgment and decision making in social context: Discourse processes and rational inference. , 2000 .

[6]  C. Mckenzie,et al.  A Bayesian view of covariation assessment , 2007, Cognitive Psychology.

[7]  P. Wason.  On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses in a Conceptual Task , 1960 .

[8]  Jonathan St. B. T. Evans,et al.  The Role of Negation in Conditional Inference , 1999 .

[9]  Victor S. Ferreira,et al.  Do Conditional Hypotheses Target Rare Events? , 2001, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[10]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Judging probable cause. , 1986 .

[11]  H. M. Jenkins,et al.  JUDGMENT OF CONTINGENCY BETWEEN RESPONSES AND OUTCOMES. , 1965, Psychological monographs.

[12]  P. C. Wason,et al.  The Processing of Positive and Negative Information , 1959 .

[13]  David R. Shanks,et al.  Effects of Trial Order on Contingency Judgments: A Comparison of Associative and Probabilistic Contrast Accounts , 1998 .

[14]  D R Shanks,et al.  Continuous monitoring of human contingency judgment across trials , 1985, Memory & cognition.

[15]  J Friedrich,et al.  Primary error detection and minimization (PEDMIN) strategies in social cognition: a reinterpretation of confirmation bias phenomena. , 1993, Psychological review.

[16]  Jason Hong,et al.  What do we , 2008, WEUSE@ICSE.

[17]  P C Wason,et al.  Reasoning about a Rule , 1968, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[18]  J. Klayman,et al.  Confirmation, Disconfirmation, and Informa-tion in Hypothesis Testing , 1987 .

[19]  D. R. Lehman,et al.  Integration of contingency information in judgments of cause, covariation, and probability. , 1998 .

[20]  P. White.  Making causal judgments from the proportion of confirming instances: the pCI rule. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[21]  D. Mandel.  Judgment dissociation theory: an analysis of differences in causal, counterfactual, and covariational reasoning. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[22]  N. Chater,et al.  Optimal data selection: Revision, review, and reevaluation , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[23]  David R. Mandel,et al.  Counterfactual and causal explanation: from early theoretical views to new frontiers , 2007 .

[24]  José A. González,et al.  Dissociation between judgments and outcome-expectancy measures in covariation learning: a signal detection theory approach. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[25]  Steven A. Sloman,et al.  Do We "do"? , 2005, Cogn. Sci..

[26]  J. Yates,et al.  Contingency Judgment: Primacy Effects and Attention Decrement * , 1985 .

[27]  A. Tversky,et al.  Causal Schemata in Judgments under Uncertainty , 1982 .

[28]  A. Maldonado,et al.  The effect of frequency of judgement and the type of trials on covariation learning. , 1998 .

[29]  P. White.  Perceiving a strong causal relation in a weak contingency: Further investigation of the evidential evaluation model of causal judgement , 2002, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[30]  E. Hearst,et al.  The feature-positive effect in adult human subjects. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[31]  Harriet Shaklee,et al.  Sources of error in judging event covariations: Effects of memory demands. , 1982 .

[32]  W. Ahn,et al.  Primacy in causal strength judgments: The effect of initial evidence for generative versus inhibitory relationships , 2001, Memory & cognition.

[33]  E A Wasserman,et al.  Judging response-outcome relations: The role of response-outcome contingency, outcome probability, and method of information presentation , 1984, Memory & cognition.

[34]  H. M. Jenkins,et al.  The display of information and the judgment of contingency. , 1965, Canadian journal of psychology.

[35]  John R. Anderson.  The Adaptive Character of Thought , 1990 .

[36]  Todd Lubart,et al.  Conditional reasoning and causation , 1991, Memory & cognition.

[37]  R. Murphy,et al.  The impact of presentation format on causal inferences , 2008 .

[38]  E. Wasserman,et al.  Causation and Association , 1996 .

[39]  Masasi Hattori,et al.  Adaptive Non-Interventional Heuristics for Covariation Detection in Causal Induction: Model Comparison and Rational Analysis , 2007, Cogn. Sci..

[40]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Causal inferences as perceptual judgments , 1995, Memory & cognition.

[41]  J. Pearl.  Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference , 2000 .

[42]  P. White.  Causal Judgement as Evaluation of Evidence: The use of Confirmatory and Disconfirmatory Information , 2003, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[43]  E. Wasserman,et al.  Multiple Methods for Examining Biased Information Use in Contingency Judgments , 1993 .

[44]  P. Cheng,et al.  From covariation to causation: a test of the assumption of causal power. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[45]  Edward A. Wasserman,et al.  Assessment of an information integration account of contingency judgment with examination of subjective cell importance and method of information presentation. , 1993 .

[46]  P. Cheng.  From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. , 1997 .

[47]  D. R. Lehman,et al.  Counterfactual thinking and ascriptions of cause and preventability. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[48]  D. Shanks,et al.  Models of covariation-based causal judgment: A review and synthesis , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[49]  C. Mckenzie,et al.  The psychological side of Hempel’s paradox of confirmation , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[50]  L. Jacoby.  Memory as cognition. , 1980, Science.

[51]  Jonathan St. B. T. Evans,et al.  Matching bias in conditional reasoning : Do we understand it after 25 years ? , 1998 .

[52]  A. Maldonado,et al.  Interaction between previous beliefs and cue predictive value in covariation-based causal induction. , 2008, Acta psychologica.

[53]  H. Kelley.  The processes of causal attribution. , 1973 .

[54]  E A Wasserman,et al.  Contributions of specific cell information to judgments of interevent contingency. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[55]  P. Wolff.  Representing causation. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[56]  P. Cheng,et al.  Covariation in natural causal induction. , 1992, Psychological review.

[57]  J. Crocker.  Biased Questions in Judgment of Covariation Studies , 1982 .

[58]  R. H. Walters.  The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence , 1960 .

[59]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Naive causality: a mental model theory of causal meaning and reasoning 1 1 All reasonings concerning , 2001 .

[60]  J. Fodor.  Psychology and Language. , 1970 .

[61]  D. Mandel,et al.  Is the Weighting of Contingency Data Contingent on the Hypothesis Assessed , 2006 .

[62]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Evaluation of evidence in causal inference. , 1981 .