Graduate studies at Western
Thinking and Reasoning 15 (2):129-166 (2011)
|Abstract||The power PC theory postulates a normative procedure for making causal inferences from contingency information, and offers this as a descriptive model of human causal judgement. The inferential procedure requires a set of assumptions, which includes the assumption that the cause being judged is distributed independently of the set of other possible causes of the same outcome. It is argued that this assumption either never holds or can never be known to hold. It is also argued that conformity of judgements to the prescriptions of the model requires a sophisticated appreciation of methodological factors and acquired domain-specific knowledge of causes, and that the theory is disconfirmed by a finding that an objective contingency that equally supports two causal inferences results in only one of them actually being made. An alternative proposal based on the hypothesis that causal understanding originates with experiences of forces exerted while acting on objects is briefly sketched|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Alison Gopnik, Clark Glymour, David M. Sobel & Laura E. Schultz, Causal Learning in Children: Causal Maps and Bayes Nets.
Charles Kemp, Noah D. Goodman & Joshua B. Tenenbaum (2010). Learning to Learn Causal Models. Cognitive Science 34 (7):1185-1243.
Marc J. Buehner & Stuart McGregor (2006). Temporal Delays Can Facilitate Causal Attribution: Towards a General Timeframe Bias in Causal Induction. Thinking and Reasoning 12 (4):353 – 378.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2010-07-27
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?