Do people reason rationally about causally related events? Markov violations,weak inferences,and failures of explaining away

Making judgments by relying on beliefs about the causal relationships between events is a fundamental capacity of everyday cognition. In the last decade, Causal Bayesian Networks have been proposed as a framework for modeling causal reasoning. Two experiments were conducted to provide comprehensive data sets with which to evaluate a variety of different types of judgments in comparison to the standard Bayesian networks calculations. Participants were introduced to a fictional system of three events and observed a set of learning trials that instantiated the multivariate distribution relating the three variables. We tested inferences on chains X₁ → Y → X₂, common cause structures X₁ ← Y → X₂, and common effect structures X₁ → Y ← X₂, on binary and numerical variables, and with high and intermediate causal strengths. We tested transitive inferences, inferences when one variable is irrelevant because it is blocked by an intervening variable (Markov Assumption), inferences from two variables to a middle variable, and inferences about the presence of one cause when the alternative cause was known to have occurred (the normative “explaining away” pattern). Compared to the normative account, in general, when the judgments should change, they change in the normative direction. However, we also discuss a few persistent violations of the standard normative model. In addition, we evaluate the relative success of 12 theoretical explanations for these deviations.     

A single session of meditation reduces of physiological indices of anger in both experienced and novice meditators

The goal of the present study was to explore how anger reduction via a single session of meditation might be measured using psychophysiological methodologies. To achieve this, 15 novice meditators (Experiment 1) and 12 practiced meditators (Experiment 2) completed autobiographical anger inductions prior to, and following, meditation training while respiration rate, heart rate, and blood pressure were measured. Participants also reported subjective anger via a visual analog scale. At both stages, the experienced meditators’ physiological reaction to the anger induction reflected that of relaxation: slowed breathing and heart rate and decreased blood pressure. Naïve meditators exhibited physiological reactions that were consistent with anger during the pre-meditation stage, while after meditation training and a second anger induction they elicited physiological evidence of relaxation. The current results examining meditation training show that the naïve group’s physiological measures mimicked those of the experienced group following a single session of meditation training.     

Leaping to Conclusions: Why Premise Relevance Affects Argument Strength

Everyday reasoning requires more evidence than raw data alone can provide. We explore the idea that people can go beyond this data by reasoning about how the data was sampled. This idea is investigated through an examination of premise non‐monotonicity, in which adding premises to a category‐based argument weakens rather than strengthens it. Relevance theories explain this phenomenon in terms of people's sensitivity to the relationships among premise items. We show that a Bayesian model of category‐based induction taking premise sampling assumptions and category similarity into account complements such theories and yields two important predictions: First, that sensitivity to premise relationships can be violated by inducing a weak sampling assumption; and second, that premise monotonicity should be restored as a result. We test these predictions with an experiment that manipulates people's assumptions in this regard, showing that people draw qualitatively different conclusions in each case.     

社会认知中归纳推论－演绎推论的不对称性现象

在社会知觉中,人们会较多的根据个体的行为表现推论其所具有的人格特质（归纳推论）,较少根据人格特质来推论个体的行为表现（演绎推论）,Maass将这一现象命名为归纳推论－演绎推论的不对称性,并在西方文化下验证了这一现象。刻板印象在这一不对称性现象中起着调节作用,行为信息与刻板印象是否一致影响了归纳推论,对与刻板印象一致的信息更易做出归纳推论,而对演绎推论没有影响。在不同的文化背景下,归纳推论－演绎推论的不对称性表现存在差异,东方文化下的个体对两种推论过程没有表现出明显的倾向性。本文介绍了这一现象的表现,并总结了产生这一社会现象的内在原因及相关的研究进展。     

类比归纳的相似性效应和概念效应比较

该文用两个实验比较了类比归纳中的相似性效应和概念效应。预备实验首先检验了实验所使用的人工概念符号的效度。结果显示,研究采用的人工符号能够按照实验要求准确控制被试对概念关系和相似性的估计。预备实验还显示,在只有相似性或概念信息的条件下,人们更加信任概念信息。在正式实验中,相似性信息和概念信息同时呈现,结果显示,在概念信息明确的时候,人会忽略相似性信息;但在相似性信息和明确的时候,人不会忽略概念信息,因此,文章得出结论：概念是类比归纳的基本构成要素。     

A Regression Framework for Causal Mediation Analysis with Applications to Behavioral Science

We introduce and extend the classical regression framework for conducting mediation analysis from the fit of only one model. Using the essential mediation components (EMCs) allows us to estimate causal mediation effects and their analytical variance. This single-equation approach reduces computation time and permits the use of a rich suite of regression tools that are not easily implemented on a system of three equations. Additionally, we extend this framework to non-nested mediation systems, provide a joint measure of mediation for complex mediation hypotheses, propose new visualizations for mediation effects, and explain why estimates of the total effect may differ depending on the approach used. Using data from social science studies, we also provide extensive illustrations of the usefulness of this framework and its advantages over traditional approaches to mediation analysis. The example data are freely available for download online and we include the R code necessary to reproduce our results.     

Against Teleological Essentialism

In two recent papers, Rose and Nichols present evidence in favor of the view that humans represent category essences in terms of a telos, such as honey-making, and not in terms of scientific essences, such as bee DNA. Here, I challenge their interpretation of the evidence and show that it is directly predicted by the main theory they seek to undermine. I argue that their results can be explained as instances of diagnostic reasoning about scientific essences.     

Knowing When Help Is Needed: A Developing Sense of Causal Complexity

Research on the division of cognitive labor has found that adults and children as young as age 5 are able to find appropriate experts for different causal systems. However, little work has explored how children and adults decide when to seek out expert knowledge in the first place. We propose that children and adults rely (in part) on “mechanism metadata,” information about mechanism information. We argue that mechanism metadata is relatively consistent across individuals exposed to similar amounts of mechanism information, and it is applicable to a wide range of causal systems. In three experiments, we show that adults and children as young as 5 years of age have a consistent sense of the causal complexity of different causal systems, and that this sense of complexity is related to decisions about when to seek expert knowledge, but over development there is a shift in focus from procedural information to internal mechanism information.     

Causal Networks or Causal Islands? The Representation of Mechanisms and the Transitivity of Causal Judgment

Knowledge of mechanisms is critical for causal reasoning. We contrasted two possible organizations of causal knowledge—an interconnected causal network, where events are causally connected without any boundaries delineating discrete mechanisms; or a set of disparate mechanisms—causal islands—such that events in different mechanisms are not thought to be related even when they belong to the same causal chain. To distinguish these possibilities, we tested whether people make transitive judgments about causal chains by inferring, given A causes B and B causes C, that A causes C. Specifically, causal chains schematized as one chunk or mechanism in semantic memory (e.g., exercising, becoming thirsty, drinking water) led to transitive causal judgments. On the other hand, chains schematized as multiple chunks (e.g., having sex, becoming pregnant, becoming nauseous) led to intransitive judgments despite strong intermediate links ((Experiments 1–3). Normative accounts of causal intransitivity could not explain these intransitive judgments (Experiments 4 and 5).     

相似和相同语言标签对幼儿归纳推理的影响

为进一步检验相似语言标签的效应,采用经典的三角属性归纳范式,通过两个实验研究了"相似/相同"的真实语言标签对4岁幼儿归纳推理的影响.在实验一中,三角范式中的三个刺激物属于同一类别,在实验二中,三个刺激物属于两种不同的类别.每个实验均有三种条件:在控制条件中,实验者用"这个"指代每个客体;在相似语言标签条件中,靶刺激与知觉不相似的比较刺激具有相同的、且暗示了类别成员关系的词素(例如,翠鸟—飞机—鸵鸟);在相同语言标签条件中,靶刺激和知觉不相似的比较刺激共享相同的语言标签(例如,鸟—飞机—鸟).结果一致显示,与控制条件相比,幼儿在相似语言标签条件下表现出了更多的基于概念的归纳,表明在真实语言标签条件下也存在相似语言标签效应.同时,研究结果也显示,幼儿在相似和相同语言标签条件下的归纳没有显著差异,说明语言标签在幼儿归纳中更可能传递了概念信息,从而挑战了Sloutsky等的理论.