| Literature DB >> 21504836 |
Caren A Frosch1, P N Johnson-Laird.
Abstract
One view of causation is deterministic: A causes B means that whenever A occurs, B occurs. An alternative view is that causation is probabilistic: the assertion means that given A, the probability of B is greater than some criterion, such as the probability of B given not-A. Evidence about the induction of causal relations cannot readily decide between these alternative accounts, and so we examined how people refute causal assertions. In four experiments most participants judged that a single counterexample of A and not-B refuted assertions of the form, A causes B. And, as a deterministic theory based on mental models predicted, participants were more likely to request multiple refutations for assertions of the form, A enables B. Similarly, refutations of the form not-A and B were more frequent for enabling than causal assertions. Causation in daily life seems to be a deterministic concept.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21504836 DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.01.015
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Psychol (Amst) ISSN: 0001-6918