Causal judgement as evaluation of evidence: The use of confirmatory and disconfirrnatory information

There are four kinds of contingency information: occurrences and nonoccurrences of an effect in the presence and absence of a cause. In two experiments participants made judgements about sets of stimulus materials in which one of these four kinds had zero frequency. The experiments tested two kinds of predictions derived from the evidential evaluation model of causal judgement, which postulates that causal judgement depends on the proportion of instances evaluated as confirmatory for the cause being judged. The model predicts significant effects of manipulating the frequency of one kind of contingency information in the absence of changes in the objective contingency. The model also predicts that extra weight will be given to one kind of confirmatory information when the other kind has zero frequency, and to one kind of disconfirmatory information when the other kind has zero frequency. Results supported both sets of predictions, and also disconfirmed predictions of the power probabilistic contrast theory of causal judgement. This research therefore favours an account of causal judgement in which contingency information is transformed into evidence, and judgement is based on the net confirmatory or disconfirmatory value of the evidence.     

Judgement of two causal candidates from contingency information: II. Effects of information about one cause on judgements of the other cause

When judgements are being made about two causes there are eight possible kinds of contingency information: occurrences and nonoccurrences of the outcome when both causes are present, when Cause 1 alone is present, when Cause 2 alone is present, and when neither cause is present. It is proposed that contingency information is used to some extent to judge proportionate strength, which is the proportion of occurrences of the outcome that each cause can account for. This leads to a prediction that judgements of one cause will be influenced by information about occurrences, but not nonoccurrences, of the outcome when only the other cause is present. In six experiments consistent support was found for this prediction when the cause being judged had a positive relation with the outcome, but no consistent tendency was found when the cause being judged had a negative relation with the outcome. The effects found for causes with positive contingency cannot be explained by the Rescorla-Wagner model of causal judgement nor by the hypothesis that causal judgements are based on conditional contingencies.     

Statistical contingency has a different impact on preparation judgements than on causal judgements

Previous studies on causal learning showed that judgements about the causal effect of a cue on an outcome depend on the statistical contingency between the presence of the cue and the outcome. We demonstrate that statistical contingency has a different impact on preparation judgements (i.e., judgements about the usefulness of responses that allow one to prepare for the outcome). Our results suggest that preparation judgements primarily reflect information about the outcome in prior situations that are identical to the test situation. These findings also add to previous evidence showing that people can use contingency information in a flexible manner depending on the type of test question.     

On the role of attention in generating explicit awareness of contingent relations: evidence from spatial priming

In a series of four experiments, we examine the hypothesis that selective attention is crucial for the generation of conscious knowledge of contingency information. We investigated this question using a spatial priming task in which participants were required to localize a target letter in a probe display. In Experiment 1, participants kept track of the frequency with which the predictive letter in the prime appeared in various locations. This manipulation had a negligible impact on contingency awareness. Subsequent experiments requiring participants to attend to features (color, location) of the predictive letter increased contingency awareness somewhat, but there remained a large proportion of individuals who remained unaware of the strong contingency. Together the results of our experiments suggest that the construct of attention does not fully capture the processes that lead to contingency awareness, and suggest a critical role for bottom-up feature integration in explicit contingency learning.     

Contributions of specific cell information to judgments of interevent contingency

College students considered the possible effect of an experimental drug on a skin rash. The information came from a 2 x 2 contingency table involving receipt or nonreceipt of the drug and improvement or nonimprovement of the rash: Cell A = receipt-improvement; Cell B = receipt-nonimprovement; Cell C = nonreceipt-improvement; Cell D = nonreceipt-nonimprovement. Without numerical information. Ss judged cells to be ordered A greater than B greater than C greater than D. The same order held when the contribution of each cell was derived from the contingency judgments of other subjects given numerical information. No such consistency was seen when one group of Ss made both judgments: whether individual Ss equally or unequally assessed the importance of the four cells, their contingency estimates showed cell use to be ordered A greater than B greater than C greater than D. These findings may result from strong biases that Ss harbor in processing contingency information.     

Continuous monitoring of human contingency judgment across trials

Recent evidence suggests that people are sensitive to the degree of contingency between their actions and ensuing outcomes, but little is known about the way in which such contingency judgments develop as more and more information about the contingency is provided. Three experiments examined this issue in the context of a video game. In Experiment 1, it was found that contingency judgments follow growth functions: When the contingency was positive, judgments increased toward a positive asymptote, and when the contingency was negative, judgments decreased toward a negative asymptote. When the contingency was zero, judgments themselves remained close to zero but were biased by the overall frequency with which the outcome occurred. In Experiment 2, it was shown that the growth function was not the result of the anchoring of early judgments at the zero point. The bias in judgments when the contingency is zero was investigated in Experiment 3. The results are discussed in terms of rule-based analyses and contemporary theories of conditioning.     

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.     

Generation of hypotheses in Wason's 2-4-6 task: an information theory approach.

We explored the "context of discovery" in Wason's 2-4-6 task, focusing on how the first hypothesis is generated. According to Oaksford and Chater (1994a) people generate hypotheses extracting "common features", or regularities, from the available triples, but their model does not explain why some regularities contribute to the hypothesis more than do other regularities. Our conjecture is that some regularities contribute to the hypothesis more than do other regularities because people estimate the amount of information in the perceived regularities and try to preserve as much information as possible in their initial hypotheses. Experiment 1, which used two initial triples, showed that the presence of high-information relational regularities in the initial triples affected the information in the initial hypotheses more than did the presence of low-information object regularities. Experiment 2 extended the results to the classic situation in which only one initial triple is given. It also suggested that amount of information is the only aspect of the structure of the triple that affects hypotheses generation. Experiment 3 confirmed the latter finding: Although relations are commonly distinguished between first-order and higher order relations, the latter being most important for generating hypotheses (Gentner, 1983), higher order relations do have an effect on Wason's 2-4-6 task only if their presence incre ases information. In the conclusion we discuss the statistical soundness of human hypotheses generation processes, and we ask an unanswered question: Amount of information explains why some regularities are preferred to others, but only within a set of "nonarbitrary" regularities; there are object regularities that are rich in information content, but are considered "arbitrary", and are not used in generating hypotheses. Which formal property can distinguish between these two sets of regularities?     

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.     

Knowledge and knowledge gaps in semantic memory of technical artifacts

Two hypotheses have been considered regarding the relation between knowledge and semantic knowledge gaps: a “knowledge clash” hypothesis predicting more awareness of knowledge gaps with increasing knowledge, and a “knowledge deficit” hypothesis whereby the relation is the opposite. In order to examine these hypotheses, graduate and undergraduate students were asked to state what they knew and what they did not know about a sample of familiar and unfamiliar artifacts. None of the above hypotheses accounted for the results. Instead, knowledge was found to be differently related to various types of unknown features: increasing knowledge was related to less unknown features of the artifacts' function and to more unknown features about contingency relations. Unknown features of the artifacts’ behaviors were frequently reported in the two knowledge conditions. The results suggest new strands of research on the metacognition of “not knowing.”     

Randomness,Contingency, and Faith: Is there a Science of Subjectivity?

Materialists argue that there is no place for God in the universe. Chance and contingency are all that structure our world. However, the materialists’ dismissal of subjectivity manifests a flawed metaphysics that invalidates their arguments against God. In this essay I explore the following: (1) How does personal metaphysics affect one's ability to do science? (2) Are the materialist arguments about contingency used to dismiss the importance of our place in the universe valid? (3) What are the implications of subjectivity on belief and science? To answer the first question, I examine the later years of Sir Alfred Russel Wallace, one of the cofounders of evolution through natural selection with Darwin. His belief in nineteenth–century spiritualism profoundly affected his standing in the scientific community. I describe the effect of spiritualism on Wallace's science. To answer the second question, I use my own work in mathematical modeling of evolutionary processes to show that randomness, and contingency at one level, can actually be nearly deterministic at another. I demonstrate how arguments about chance and contingency do not imply anything relevant about whether there is a designer behind the universe. To answer the third question I begin by exploring a paradox of consciousness and show how the existence of subjective truths may provide a paradigm for sustaining a rational belief in God. These questions form the framework of a structured belief in a creator while yet embracing what science has to offer about the development of life on our planet.     

Judgment of contingency in depressed and nondepressed students: sadder but wiser?

How are humans' subjective judgments of contingencies related to objective contingencies? Work in social psychology and human contingency learning predicts that the greater the frequency of desired outcomes, the greater people's judgments of contingency will be. Second, the learned helplessness theory of depression provides both a strong and a weak prediction concerning the linkage between subjective and objective contingencies. According to the strong prediction, depressed individuals should underestimate the degree of contingency between their responses and outcomes relative to the objective degree of contingency. According to the weak prediction, depressed individuals merely should judge that there is a smaller degree of contingency between their responses and outcomes than nondepressed individuals should. In addition, the present investigation deduced a new strong prediction from the helplessness theory: Nondepressed individuals should overestimate the degree of contingency between their responses and outcomes relative to the objective degree of contingency. In the experiments, depressed and nondepressed students were present with one of a series of problems varying in the actual degree of contingency. In each problem, subjects estimated the degree of contingency between their responses (pressing or not pressing a button) and an environmental outcome (onset of a green light). Performance on a behavioral task and estimates of the conditional probability of green light onset associated with the two response alternatives provided additional measures for assessing beliefs about contingencies. Depressed students' judgments of contingency were surprisingly accurate in all four experiments. Nondepressed students, on the other hand, overestimated the degree of contingency between their responses and outcomes when noncontingent outcomes were frequent and/or desired and underestimated the degree of contingency when contingent outcomes were undesired. Thus, predictions derived from social psychology concerning the linkage between subjective and objective contingencies were confirmed for nondepressed students but not for depressed students. Further, the predictions of helplessness theory received, at best, minimal support. The learned helplessness and self-serving motivational bias hypotheses are evaluated as explanations of the results. In addition, parallels are drawn between the present results and phenomena in cognitive psychology, social psychology, and animal learning. Finally, implications for cognitive illusions in normal people, appetitive helplessness, judgment of contingency between stimuli, and learning theory are discussed.     

Male versus female leaders: A comparison of empirical studies

One of the popular reasons given for differential treatment of women in management stems from stereotyping females as ineffective leaders. Thirty-two female leadership studies were reviewed. Trait, style, and contingency leadership theories were used as a framework to analyze the studies. The trait studies consistently supported the traditional attitude that women lack adequate leadership characteristics. Both style and contingency studies were split as to whether women were effective or ineffective leaders. Most student studies supported the commonly held beliefs about women's leadership style and effectiveness. On the other hand, managerial studies did not support the typical female stereotyping; this suggests the possibility of a socializing process modifying practicing managers' attitudes towards women, and it also raises a question about the validity of stereotyping as a discriminatory causal factor in managerial environments. Before more conclusive statements can be made, further sex-related leadership research controlling for subjects and methodology is suggested.     

Goal-driven reasoning overcomes cell D neglect in contingency judgements

Research on contingency judgement typically shows cell weight inequality such that the information in cell A of a contingency table is considered more relevant than the information in cell D, even though both kinds of information have the same confirmatory meaning. Two studies tested whether goal-driven reasoning can lead people to realise the value of the information in cell D. Participants' goal to defend a particular conclusion for which the information in cell D was helpful was manipulated. Whereas participants who did not have that goal displayed the usual cell D neglect, goal-driven participants for whom cell D contained goal-relevant information considered it important. More importantly, in subsequent tasks with different contents where participants were no longer driven by any goal, they continued to consider information in cell D relevant (Study 1), and they were more likely to make correct contingency judgements, which depended on considering cell D (Study 2).     

The production of determiners: evidence from French.

In numerous languages determiner forms depend not only on semantic information but also on several other kinds of information, such as the grammatical gender of the controlling noun or the phonological properties of the context. In the present research we contrasted two possible accounts of determiner retrieval: one in which every type of required information is bundled into a unitized representation for determiner retrieval and one in which each type of information can individually activate determiner forms. These alternative hypotheses were investigated in three experiments in which native speakers of French named pictures with simple [determiner + noun] or complex [determiner + adjective + noun] noun phrases. In the experiments, the properties of the contextual cues that drive the retrieval of the determiner were manipulated - for example, we manipulated the number of determiner forms that are compatible with a given grammatical gender and the number of grammatical genders that a given determiner form can be used with. Neither hypothesis can fully account for the results of the three experiments. However, a hybrid hypothesis that combines the principal features of the two hypotheses provides a good account of the data.     

What is Genetic Information,and why is it Significant? A Contextual,Contrastive, Approach

abstract Is genetic information of special ethical significance? Does it require special regulation? There is considerable contemporary debate about this question (the ‘genetic exceptionalism’ debate). ‘Genetic information’ is an ambiguous term and, as an aid to avoiding conflation in the genetic exceptionalism debate, a detailed account is given of just how and why ‘genetic information’ is ambiguous. Whilst ambiguity is a ubiquitous problem of communication, it is suggested that ‘genetic information’ is ambiguous in a particular way, one that gives rise to the problem of ‘significance creep’ (i.e., where claims about the significance of certain kinds of genetic information in one context influence our thinking about the significance of other kinds of genetic information in other contexts). A contextual and contrastive methodology is proposed: evaluating the significance of genetic information requires us to be sensitive to the polysemy of ‘genetic information’ across contexts and then examine the contrast in significance (if any) of genetic, as opposed to nongenetic, information within contexts. This, in turn, suggests that a proper solution to the regulatory question requires us to pay more attention to how and why information, and its acquisition, possession and use, come to be of ethical significance.     

Predictions and causal estimations are not supported by the same associative structure

Studies performed by different researchers have shown that judgements about cue-outcome relationships are systematically influenced by the type of question used to request those judgements. It is now recognized that judgements about the strength of the causal link between a cue and an outcome are mostly determined by the cue-outcome contingency, whereas predictions of the outcome are more influenced by the probability of the outcome given the cue. Although these results make clear that those different types of judgement are mediated by some knowledge of the normative differences between causal estimations and outcome predictions, they do not speak to the underlying processes of these effects. The experiment presented here reveals an interaction between the type of question and the order of trials that challenges standard models of causal and predictive learning that are framed exclusively in associative terms or exclusively in higher order reasoning terms. However, this evidence could be easily explained by assuming the combined intervention of both types of process.     

The role of alternative hypotheses in the integration of evidence that disconfirms an acquired belief

Two experiments examined the role of alternative hypotheses in the recognition of belief-incongruent evidence and the consequent attribution of probative value to that evidence. Using a contingency judgement and prediction task, subjects monitored multiple predictor-outcome contingencies. In a subset of three of these contingencies the evidence strongly endorsed a positive contingency in a first phase but strongly endorsed a negative contingency in a second phase. In Experiment 1 the negative evidence was presented, in part, in terms of an alternative contingency involving a new predictor or a new outcome, or in terms of no alternatives. The presence of alternative hypotheses did not influence the recognition of the negative evidence but significantly reduced the subjects' persistence in predicting the outcome in the presence of the predictor. Using the same positive-negative contingencies, Experiment 2 replicated this effect but also demonstrated that error in the feedback during the negative phase strengthened the perseverance in outcome predictions even when subjects acknowledged the negative nature of the evidence. Results from these two experiments indicate that prior beliefs do not bias the recognition of belief-incongruent evidence but the integration of that evidence is determined by the nature of the alternative hypotheses available to the reasoner.     

Implicit contributions of context to recognition

Studies of the impact of context on remembering have not focused on the influence of contextual contingency on subsequent recognition in the condition in which the contingency cannot be verbalized. In two experiments, we analyzed the effect of an implicitly encoded position contingency involving location and semantic category on both hit and false alarm recognition judgments after 1 day and 1 week delays. We vigorously probed for what participants could say about the contingency. We found context effects for both hits and false alarms, whether or not participants could verbalize any knowledge they might have of contingency. These results suggest that people may use contextual information when making a recognition judgment even if they are not aware of this information.