Literature DB >> 33362641

How Does Explanatory Virtue Determine Probability Estimation?-Empirical Discussion on Effect of Instruction.

Asaya Shimojo1, Kazuhisa Miwa1, Hitoshi Terai2.   

Abstract

It is important to reveal how humans evaluate an explanation of the recent development of explainable artificial intelligence. So, what makes people feel that one explanation is more likely than another? In the present study, we examine how explanatory virtues affect the process of estimating subjective posterior probability. Through systematically manipulating two virtues, Simplicity-the number of causes used to explain effects-and Scope-the number of effects predicted by causes-in three different conditions, we clarified two points in Experiment 1: (i) that Scope's effect is greater than Simplicity's; and (ii) that these virtues affect the outcome independently. In Experiment 2, we found that instruction about the explanatory structure increased the impact of both virtues' effects but especially that of Simplicity. These results suggest that Scope predominantly affects the estimation of subjective posterior probability, but that, if perspective on the explanatory structure is provided, Simplicity can also affect probability estimation.
Copyright © 2020 Shimojo, Miwa and Terai.

Entities:  

Keywords:  causal explanation; diagnostic reasoning; explanatory virtue; inference to the best explanation; subjective probability

Year:  2020        PMID: 33362641      PMCID: PMC7756058          DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.575746

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Psychol        ISSN: 1664-1078


  21 in total

1.  From covariation to causation: a test of the assumption of causal power.

Authors:  Marc J Buehner; Patricia W Cheng; Deborah Clifford
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  Non-bayesian inference: causal structure trumps correlation.

Authors:  Bénédicte Bes; Steven Sloman; Christopher G Lucas; Eric Raufaste
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2012-06-26

3.  Simplicity and probability in causal explanation.

Authors:  Tania Lombrozo
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2006-11-09       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Learning to learn causal models.

Authors:  Charles Kemp; Noah D Goodman; Joshua B Tenenbaum
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2010-08-23

5.  Structure-function fit underlies the evaluation of teleological explanations.

Authors:  Emily G Liquin; Tania Lombrozo
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2018-10-12       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Sense-making under ignorance.

Authors:  Samuel G B Johnson; Greeshma Rajeev-Kumar; Frank C Keil
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2016-07-29       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Harry Potter and the sorcerer's scope: latent scope biases in explanatory reasoning.

Authors:  Sangeet S Khemlani; Abigail B Sussman; Daniel M Oppenheimer
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-04

Review 8.  Explanatory Preferences Shape Learning and Inference.

Authors:  Tania Lombrozo
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 20.229

Review 9.  Base-rate respect: From ecological rationality to dual processes.

Authors:  Aron K Barbey; Steven A Sloman
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 12.579

10.  Best, second-best, and good-enough explanations: How they matter to reasoning.

Authors:  Igor Douven; Patricia Mirabile
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 3.051

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.