Perales José C, Shanks David R
University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2007 Aug;14(4):577-96. doi: 10.3758/bf03196807.
Causal judgment is assumed to play a central role in prediction, control, and explanation. Here, we consider the function or functions that map contingency information concerning the relationship between a single cue and a single outcome onto causal judgments. We evaluate normative accounts of causal induction and report the findings of an extensive meta-analysis in which we used a cross-validation model-fitting method and carried out a qualitative analysis of experimental trends in order to compare a number of alternative models. The best model to emerge from this competition is one in which judgments are based on the difference between the amount of confirming and disconfirming evidence. A rational justification for the use of this model is proposed.
因果判断被认为在预测、控制和解释中起着核心作用。在此,我们考虑将关于单个线索与单个结果之间关系的偶然性信息映射到因果判断的一个或多个函数。我们评估因果归纳的规范性解释,并报告一项广泛的元分析的结果,在该分析中我们使用了交叉验证模型拟合方法,并对实验趋势进行了定性分析,以便比较多个替代模型。从这场竞争中脱颖而出的最佳模型是一种判断基于确认性证据与非确认性证据数量之差的模型。我们为使用该模型提出了一个合理的理由。