Tangen Jason M, Allan Lorraine G
Department of Psychology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada.
Mem Cognit. 2004 Jan;32(1):107-24. doi: 10.3758/bf03195824.
In four experiments, the predictions made by causal model theory and the Rescorla-Wagner model were tested by using a cue interaction paradigm that measures the relative response to a given event based on the influence or salience of an alternative event. Experiments 1 and 2 uncorrelated two variables that have typically been confounded in the literature (causal order and the number of cues and outcomes) and demonstrated that overall contingency judgments are influenced by the causal structure of the events. Experiment 3 showed that trial-by-trial prediction responses, a second measure of causal assessment, were not influenced by the causal structure of the described events. Experiment 4 revealed that participants became less sensitive to the influence of the causal structure in both their ratings and their predictions as trials progressed. Thus, two experiments provided evidence for high-level (causal reasoning) processes, and two experiments provided evidence for low-level (associative) processes. We argue that both factors influence causal assessment, depending on what is being asked about the events and participants' experience with those events.
在四项实验中，通过使用一种线索交互范式来测试因果模型理论和雷斯克拉 - 瓦格纳模型所做的预测，该范式基于替代事件的影响或显著性来衡量对给定事件的相对反应。实验1和实验2将文献中通常混淆的两个变量（因果顺序以及线索和结果的数量）进行了去相关处理，并证明总体偶然性判断受事件因果结构的影响。实验3表明，逐个试验的预测反应（因果评估的第二项指标）不受所描述事件因果结构的影响。实验4显示，随着试验的进行，参与者在评分和预测中对因果结构影响的敏感度均降低。因此，两项实验为高级（因果推理）过程提供了证据，另外两项实验为低级（联想）过程提供了证据。我们认为，这两个因素都会影响因果评估，具体取决于针对事件所询问的内容以及参与者对这些事件的经验。
