Age differences in contingency judgement linked to perceptual segregation

We demonstrate large differences in judging positive and null contingencies between younger and older adults with a task commonly used to explore cue competition in both contingency and causality judgements. The one-phase blocking task uses two cues, with separate contingencies with the same outcome. The age differences persisted even when participants knew in advance which of the two contingencies to judge. The age differences disappeared, however, when the stimulus display contained markers aiding perceptual segregation. We suggest that the age differences elicited in the one-phase blocking task are linked to decrements in perceptual segregation.     

Causal judgement from information about outcome magnitude

Information was presented in which a candidate cause was either present or absent, and the outcome variable (number of spots on a patient's skin) could take any of four nonzero values. It was found that cause-absent information carried greater weight than cause-present information. This is contrary to the usual finding for contingency information about binary outcome variables. Judgement was influenced more by extreme values of the outcome variable, and larger outcome values tended to have more effect on judgements than smaller outcome values. The hypothesis that participants compute linear correlation is disconfirmed by these results. Instead, the results show that participants focus disproportionate attention on some kinds of events and neglect others.     

Similarity in Spatial Origin of Information Facilitates Cue Competition and Interference

Two lick suppression studies were conducted with water-deprived rats to investigate the influence of spatial similarity in cue interaction. Experiment 1 assessed the influence of similarity of the spatial origin of competing cues in a blocking procedure. Greater blocking was observed in the condition in which the auditory blocking cue and the auditory blocked cue originated at the same spatial location. Recent investigations have demonstrated that manipulations that impact competition between cues trained together have similar effects on interference between cues trained apart. Therefore, Experiment 2 investigated the influence of similarity of the spatial origin in proactive interference of Pavlovian conditioning by separately pairing two auditory cues with a common outcome, originating at the same spatial location or different spatial locations. Greater proactive interference was observed in the condition in which the interfering cue and target cue originated at the same spatial location. The results are considered in light of the possibility that a similar mechanism may underlie interference between cues trained apart and cue competition between cues trained together.     

When is a cause the “same”? Incoherent generalization across contexts

A theory or model of cause such as Cheng's power (p) allows people to predict the effectiveness of a cause in a different causal context from the one in which they observed its actions. Liljeholm and Cheng demonstrated that people could detect differences in the effectiveness of the cause when causal power varied across contexts of different outcome base rates, but that they did not detect similar changes when only the cause–outcome contingency, ?p, but not power, varied. However, their procedure allowed participants to simplify the causal scenarios and consider only a subsample of observations with a base rate of zero. This confounds p, ?p, and the probability of an outcome (O) given a cause (C), P(O|C). Furthermore, the contingencies that they used confounded p and P(O|C) in the overall sample. Following the work of Liljeholm and Cheng, we examined whether causal induction in a wider range of situations follows the principles suggested by Cheng. Experiments 1a and 1b compared the procedure used by Liljeholm and Cheng with one that did not allow the sample of observations to be simplified. Experiments 2a and 2b compared the same two procedures using contingencies that controlled for P(O|C). The results indicated that, if the possibility of converting all contexts to a zero base rate situation was avoided, people were sensitive to changes in P(O|C), p, and ?p when each of these was varied. This is inconsistent with Liljeholm and Cheng's conclusion that people detect only changes in p. These results question the idea that people naturally extract the metric or model of cause from their observation of stochastic events and then, reasonably exclusively, use this theory of a causal mechanism, or for that matter any simple normative theory, to generalize their experience to alternative contexts.     

大学生对两个原因交互作用效应的评估

用大学生被试的两个实验考察人们对两个原因交互作用效应的定性评估和定量评估。实验结果表明,被试的定性评估与交互作用对比的性质相一致,而与因果力的性质不相一致;被试的定量评估随交互作用对比值增加而增加,而不受因果力的影响。实验结果一致支持交互作用对比标准,而不支持因果力标准和交叉乘积比率标准。这不同于以往的有关研究结果     

Causal judgements about two causal candidates: Accounting for occurrences,estimating strength,and the importance of interaction judgements

When two possible causes of an outcome are under consideration, contingency information concerns each possible combination of presence and absence of the two causes with occurrences and nonoccurrences of the outcome. White (2008) proposed that such judgements could be predicted by a weighted averaging model integrating these kinds of contingency information. The weights in the model are derived from the hypothesis that causal judgements seek to meet two main aims, accounting for occurrences of the outcome and estimating the strengths of the causes. Here it is shown that the model can explain many but not all relevant published findings. The remainder can be explained by reasoning about interactions between the two causes, by scenario-specific effects, and by variations in cell weight depending on quantity of available information. An experiment is reported that supports this argument. The review and experimental results support the case for a cognitive model of causal judgement in which different kinds of contingency information are utilised to satisfy particular aims of the judgement process.     

Cue competition effects in human causal learning

Five experiments involving human causal learning were conducted to compare the cue competition effects known as blocking and unovershadowing, in proactive and retroactive instantiations. Experiment 1 demonstrated reliable proactive blocking and unovershadowing but only retroactive unovershadowing. Experiment 2 replicated the same pattern and showed that the retroactive unovershadowing that was observed was interfered with by a secondary memory task that had no demonstrable effect on either proactive unovershadowing or blocking. Experiments 3a, 3b, and 3c demonstrated that retroactive unovershadowing was accompanied by an inflated memory effect not accompanying proactive unovershadowing. The differential pattern of proactive versus retroactive cue competition effects is discussed in relationship to amenable associative and inferential processing possibilities.     

Valuing intervention and observation

Understanding causal relations is fundamental to effective action but causal data can be confounded. We examined the value that participants placed on data derived from a hypothetical intervention or observation. Our materials involved a possible cause (“bottled water”), a possible confound (“food”), and a context (“a restaurant”). We supposed that participants seek to draw as specific a causal inference as possible from presented data and value information sources more highly that allow them to do so. On this basis, we predicted that in circumstances where an intervention removed the confounding causal factor but observation did not, participants would prefer data derived from an intervention when the possible cause was present (the bottled water was drunk) but show the reverse preference when the possible cause was absent (the bottled water was not drunk). Experiment 1 confirmed this prediction. Using a between-subjects design, Experiment 2 tested for a difference in confidence in causal judgements given identical data, including data on the confound, as a function of method of data collection (intervention or observation). There was no significant difference in confidence ratings between the two methods but confidence ratings were sensitive to the probability of an effect (illness) given the cause. Using a within-subjects design, Experiment 3 revealed systematic individual differences in preference for the two methods. Participants were divided between those who considered intervention more confounded and those who considered observation more confounded. Our experiments point to the subtleties of participants' evaluation of data from studies of human beings.     

The role of mechanism and covariation information in causal belief updating

The present study is aimed at identifying how prior causal beliefs and covariation information contribute to belief updating when evidence, either compatible or contradictory with those beliefs, is provided. Participants were presented with a cover story with which it was intended to activate or generate a causal belief. Variables related to the prior belief (the type of information, the strength of the cause-effect causal link, and how confident the participant was that the link existed) were assessed. Subsequently, participants were presented with covariational information and were asked to update their beliefs in light of the new evidence. Information reliability, prior belief's causal influence magnitude, and the cause-effect level of contingency portrayed by the new information--but not the type of the prior belief--are shown to directly determine belief updating.     

Extinction in human learning and memory

In two experiments, participants were given extinction training in a human causal learning task. In both experiments, three critical experimental cues were paired with different outcomes in a first phase of training and were then extinguished in a second phase. Three control cues were given the same treatment in the first phase of training, but were not then presented in the second phase. Participants' ability to correctly identify the outcome with which each cue had been paired in the first phase was lower for extinguished than for control cues. Causal attributions to the extinguished cues were also lower than those to the control cues, a difference that correlated with outcome memory. These data are consistent with the idea that extinction in causal judgement is due, at least in part, to a failure to remember the cue–outcome relationship encoded in the first phase of training.     

Encouraging children to think counterfactually enhances blocking in a causal learning task

According to a higher order reasoning account, inferential reasoning processes underpin the widely observed cue competition effect of blocking in causal learning. The inference required for blocking has been described as modus tollens (if p then q, not q therefore not p). Young children are known to have difficulties with this type of inference, but research with adults suggests that this inference is easier if participants think counterfactually. In this study, 100 children (51 five-year-olds and 49 six- to seven-year-olds) were assigned to two types of pretraining groups. The counterfactual group observed demonstrations of cues paired with outcomes and answered questions about what the outcome would have been if the causal status of cues had been different, whereas the factual group answered factual questions about the same demonstrations. Children then completed a causal learning task. Counterfactual pretraining enhanced levels of blocking as well as modus tollens reasoning but only for the younger children. These findings provide new evidence for an important role for inferential reasoning in causal learning.     

Where science starts: spontaneous experiments in preschoolers' exploratory play

Probabilistic models of expected information gain require integrating prior knowledge about causal hypotheses with knowledge about possible actions that might generate data relevant to those hypotheses. Here we looked at whether preschoolers (mean: 54 months) recognize “action possibilities” (affordances) in the environment that allow them to isolate variables when there is information to be gained. By manipulating the physical properties of the stimuli, we were able to affect the degree to which candidate variables could be isolated; by manipulating the base rate of candidate causes, we were able to affect the potential for information gain. Children’s exploratory play was sensitive to both manipulations: given unambiguous evidence children played indiscriminately and rarely tried to isolate candidate causes; given ambiguous evidence, children both selected (Experiment 1) and designed (Experiment 2) informative interventions.     

Explanatory models of illness: a study of within-culture variation

The current studies explore causal models of heart attack and depression generated from American healers whom use distinct explanatory frameworks. Causal chains leading to two illnesses, heart attack and depression, were elicited from participant groups: registered nurses (RNs), energy healers, RN energy healers, and undergraduates. The domain-specificity hypothesis predicted that psycho-social and physical causes would not interact in illness models. Across illnesses, RNs and undergraduates rarely cited interactions between mental and physical causes, consistent with the domain specificity hypothesis. In contrast, energy healers frequently mentioned interactions. Study 2 showed that these differences were not due to salience. These results suggest that domain-specificity theory is supported for groups with extensive exposure to western medicine but does not explain energy models of illness. Implications for other cultural models of illness are discussed.     

Making the uncontrollable seem controllable: The role of action in the illusion of control

It is well known that certain variables can bias judgements about the perceived contingency between an action and an outcome, making them depart from the normative predictions. For instance, previous studies have proven that the activity level or probability of responding, P(R), is a crucial variable that can affect these judgements in objectively noncontingent situations. A possible account for the P(R) effect is based on the differential exposure to actual contingencies during the training phase, which is in turn presumably produced by individual differences in participants' P(R). The current two experiments replicate the P(R) effect in a free-response paradigm, and show that participants' judgements are better predicted by P(R) than by the actual contingency to which they expose themselves. Besides, both experiments converge with previous empirical data, showing a persistent bias that does not vanish as training proceeds. These findings contrast with the preasymptotic and transitory effect predicted by several theoretical models.     

Do infants perceive the social robot Keepon as a communicative partner?

This study investigates if infants perceive an unfamiliar agent, such as the robot Keepon, as a social agent after observing an interaction between the robot and a human adult. 23 infants, aged 9–17 month, were exposed, in a first phase, to either a contingent interaction between the active robot and an active human adult, or to an interaction between an active human adult and the non-active robot, followed by a second phase, in which infants were offered the opportunity to initiate a turn-taking interaction with Keepon.The measured variables were: (1) the number of social initiations the infant directed toward the robot, and (2) the number of anticipatory orientations of attention to the agent that follows in the conversation. The results indicate a significant higher level of initiations in the interactive robot condition compared to the non-active robot condition, while the difference between the frequencies of anticipations of turn-taking behaviors was not significant.     

Evidence that a transient but cognitively demanding process underlies forward blocking

Blocking is a learning phenomenon in which prior experience inhibits learning about novel cues. Though the phenomenon itself has been well documented, the details of blocking-related processes still remain contentious. Two experiments investigated whether participants were engaged in demanding cognitive processing during different portions of a standard blocking paradigm. Participants in Experiment 1 engaged in a simple secondary task while completing a standard blocking procedure. Results showed that performance on the secondary task was briefly diminished early in the second phase of the blocking paradigm, when the novel cue is first paired with the pretrained cue. Participants in Experiment 2 performed a difficult cognitive load task during either the early or the late portions of the second phase of blocking. The blocking effect was eliminated when learners were under load early in the second phase, but not when learners were under load late in the second phase. These results suggest that blocking relies on a cognitively demanding process with a distinct time course. Computational simulations illustrate how a model that includes top-down (i.e., cognitively demanding) attentional modulation can reproduce the observed behaviour. This suggests that purely associative processes are not sufficient to explain the observed behaviour. Implications for current accounts of blocking are discussed.