• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

因果判断中的线索交互效应:基于证据评估模型的解释

Cue interaction effects in causal judgement: an interpretation in terms of the evidential evaluation model.

作者信息

White Peter A

机构信息

School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.

出版信息

Q J Exp Psychol B. 2005 Apr;58(2):99-140. doi: 10.1080/02724990444000078.

DOI:10.1080/02724990444000078
PMID:16095042
Abstract

In judging the extent to which a cue causes an outcome, judgement can be affected by information about other cues that are correlated with the one being judged. These cue interaction effects have usually been interpreted in terms of associative learning processes. I propose that a different model of causal judgement, the evidential evaluation model, offers a viable alternative interpretation of cue interaction phenomena. Under the evidential evaluation model, instances of contingency information are interpreted as evidence, which is confirmatory, disconfirmatory, or irrelevant for the cue being judged. When two cues co-occur in a set of instances the evidential value of the instances for one of them is determined by three factors: the proportion of confirming instances in the set; disambiguation value, which concerns the relation between the set of information and prior beliefs about the co-occurring cue; and confirmation value, which concerns the relation between the set of information and prior beliefs about the cue being judged. Any previous judgement of the cue is then modified in the light of these. It is shown that this model can account for all the cue interaction phenomena that have been investigated in studies of human causal judgement. The model also generates novel predictions, and the results of three experiments give support to these predictions. It is also shown that several other current models of causal judgement fail to predict a key result from Experiment 3.

摘要

在判断一个线索导致某种结果的程度时,判断可能会受到与被判断线索相关的其他线索信息的影响。这些线索交互效应通常根据联想学习过程来解释。我提出,一种不同的因果判断模型,即证据评估模型,为线索交互现象提供了一种可行的替代解释。在证据评估模型下,偶然性信息的实例被解释为证据,对于被判断的线索来说,这些证据可能是证实性的、证伪性的或无关的。当两个线索在一组实例中共同出现时,这些实例对其中一个线索的证据价值由三个因素决定:该组中证实性实例的比例;消歧价值,它涉及信息集与关于共同出现线索的先验信念之间的关系;以及确认价值,它涉及信息集与关于被判断线索的先验信念之间的关系。然后根据这些因素对线索的任何先前判断进行修正。结果表明,该模型可以解释在人类因果判断研究中所考察的所有线索交互现象。该模型还产生了新的预测,并且三个实验的结果支持了这些预测。研究还表明,其他几种当前的因果判断模型无法预测实验3的一个关键结果。

相似文献

1
Cue interaction effects in causal judgement: an interpretation in terms of the evidential evaluation model.因果判断中的线索交互效应:基于证据评估模型的解释
Q J Exp Psychol B. 2005 Apr;58(2):99-140. doi: 10.1080/02724990444000078.
2
Predictions and causal estimations are not supported by the same associative structure.预测和因果估计并不由相同的关联结构所支持。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2007 Mar;60(3):433-47. doi: 10.1080/17470210601002520.
3
Perceiving a strong causal relation in a weak contingency: further investigation of the evidential evaluation model of causal judgement.在微弱的相依关系中感知强烈的因果关系:因果判断证据评估模型的进一步研究
Q J Exp Psychol A. 2002 Jan;55(1):97-114. doi: 10.1080/02724980143000181.
4
Statistical contingency has a different impact on preparation judgements than on causal judgements.统计偶然性对准备判断的影响与对因果判断的影响不同。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2007 Mar;60(3):418-32. doi: 10.1080/17470210601001084.
5
The relative effect of cue interaction.线索交互作用的相对效应。
Q J Exp Psychol B. 2003 Aug;56(3):279-300. doi: 10.1080/02724990244000278.
6
Extinction in human learning and memory.人类学习与记忆中的消退
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2008 Oct;61(10):1472-8. doi: 10.1080/17470210802161406. Epub 2008 Jun 19.
7
Causal judgement from contingency information: judging interactions between two causal candidates.基于偶然性信息的因果判断:判断两个因果候选因素之间的相互作用
Q J Exp Psychol A. 2002 Jul;55(3):819-38. doi: 10.1080/02724980143000596.
8
Selective attention in human associative learning and recognition memory.人类联想学习与识别记忆中的选择性注意
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2008 Nov;137(4):626-48. doi: 10.1037/a0013685.
9
Accounting for occurrences: a new view of the use of contingency information in causal judgment.对事件的考量:因果判断中偶然性信息使用的新视角。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Jan;34(1):204-18. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.204.
10
A comparison of cue competition in a simple and a complex design.简单设计与复杂设计中线索竞争的比较。
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2006 Jul;122(3):234-46. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.11.003. Epub 2006 Jan 10.

引用本文的文献

1
Models of covariation-based causal judgment: a review and synthesis.基于共变的因果判断模型:综述与综合
Psychon Bull Rev. 2007 Aug;14(4):577-96. doi: 10.3758/bf03196807.