• 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

保守的健忘学者:人们如何通过一系列干预来学习因果结构。

Conservative forgetful scholars: How people learn causal structure through sequences of interventions.

作者信息

Bramley Neil R, Lagnado David A, Speekenbrink Maarten

机构信息

Department of Experimental Psychology, University College London.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2015 May;41(3):708-31. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000061. Epub 2014 Oct 20.

DOI:10.1037/xlm0000061
PMID:25329086
Abstract

Interacting with a system is key to uncovering its causal structure. A computational framework for interventional causal learning has been developed over the last decade, but how real causal learners might achieve or approximate the computations entailed by this framework is still poorly understood. Here we describe an interactive computer task in which participants were incentivized to learn the structure of probabilistic causal systems through free selection of multiple interventions. We develop models of participants' intervention choices and online structure judgments, using expected utility gain, probability gain, and information gain and introducing plausible memory and processing constraints. We find that successful participants are best described by a model that acts to maximize information (rather than expected score or probability of being correct); that forgets much of the evidence received in earlier trials; but that mitigates this by being conservative, preferring structures consistent with earlier stated beliefs. We explore 2 heuristics that partly explain how participants might be approximating these models without explicitly representing or updating a hypothesis space.

摘要

与系统交互是揭示其因果结构的关键。在过去十年中,已经开发了一个用于干预性因果学习的计算框架,但真实的因果学习者如何实现或近似该框架所涉及的计算,目前仍知之甚少。在此,我们描述了一项交互式计算机任务,在该任务中,参与者通过自由选择多种干预措施来学习概率因果系统的结构。我们使用预期效用增益、概率增益和信息增益,并引入合理的记忆和处理约束,开发了参与者干预选择和在线结构判断的模型。我们发现,成功的参与者最好用一个旨在最大化信息(而不是预期分数或正确概率)的模型来描述;该模型会遗忘早期试验中收到的许多证据;但通过保持保守来减轻这种情况,即倾向于与早期陈述的信念一致的结构。我们探索了两种启发式方法,它们部分解释了参与者如何在不明确表示或更新假设空间的情况下近似这些模型。

相似文献

1
Conservative forgetful scholars: How people learn causal structure through sequences of interventions.保守的健忘学者:人们如何通过一系列干预来学习因果结构。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2015 May;41(3):708-31. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000061. Epub 2014 Oct 20.
2
Identifying expectations about the strength of causal relationships.确定对因果关系强度的预期。
Cogn Psychol. 2015 Feb;76:1-29. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.11.001. Epub 2014 Dec 15.
3
The role of causal models in multiple judgments under uncertainty.因果模型在不确定性下的多重判断中的作用。
Cognition. 2014 Dec;133(3):611-20. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.08.011. Epub 2014 Sep 19.
4
Time in causal structure learning.因果结构学习中的时间
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2018 Dec;44(12):1880-1910. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000548. Epub 2018 May 10.
5
Strategies to intervene on causal systems are adaptively selected.针对因果系统进行干预的策略会被适应性地选择。
Cogn Psychol. 2015 Jun;79:102-33. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.02.004. Epub 2015 May 15.
6
Non-bayesian inference: causal structure trumps correlation.非贝叶斯推理:因果结构胜过相关性。
Cogn Sci. 2012 Sep-Oct;36(7):1178-203. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2012.01262.x. Epub 2012 Jun 26.
7
Are causal structure and intervention judgments inextricably linked? A developmental study.因果结构与干预判断是否密不可分?一项发展研究。
Cogn Sci. 2012 Mar;36(2):261-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01208.x. Epub 2011 Nov 3.
8
Decision makers conceive of their choices as interventions.决策者将他们的选择视为干预措施。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2009 Feb;138(1):22-38. doi: 10.1037/a0014585.
9
Analogical and category-based inference: a theoretical integration with Bayesian causal models.类比推理和基于范畴的推理:与贝叶斯因果模型的理论整合。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2010 Nov;139(4):702-27. doi: 10.1037/a0020488.
10
A quantitative causal model theory of conditional reasoning.条件推理的定量因果模型理论。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2013 Sep;39(5):1327-43. doi: 10.1037/a0031851. Epub 2013 Apr 8.

引用本文的文献

1
Probabilistic causal reasoning under time pressure.时间压力下的概率因果推理。
PLoS One. 2024 Apr 11;19(4):e0297011. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297011. eCollection 2024.
2
The Bayesian Mutation Sampler Explains Distributions of Causal Judgments.贝叶斯突变采样器解释了因果判断的分布。
Open Mind (Camb). 2023 Jun 15;7:318-349. doi: 10.1162/opmi_a_00080. eCollection 2023.
3
Visuospatial information foraging describes search behavior in learning latent environmental features.视空间信息搜索描述了在学习潜在环境特征中的搜索行为。
Sci Rep. 2023 Jan 20;13(1):1126. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-27662-9.
4
The Paradox of Time in Dynamic Causal Systems.动态因果系统中的时间悖论。
Entropy (Basel). 2022 Jun 23;24(7):863. doi: 10.3390/e24070863.
5
How Do People Generalize Causal Relations over Objects? A Non-parametric Bayesian Account.人们如何对物体间的因果关系进行归纳?一种非参数贝叶斯解释。
Comput Brain Behav. 2022;5(1):22-44. doi: 10.1007/s42113-021-00124-z. Epub 2021 Nov 30.
6
Individual differences in strategy use and performance during fault diagnosis.个体在故障诊断中策略使用和表现的差异。
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2020 Oct 23;5(1):49. doi: 10.1186/s41235-020-00250-5.
7
The ventral striatum dissociates information expectation, reward anticipation, and reward receipt.腹侧纹状体分离了信息预期、奖励预期和奖励接收。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jun 30;117(26):15200-15208. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1911778117. Epub 2020 Jun 11.
8
Causal Structure Learning in Continuous Systems.连续系统中的因果结构学习
Front Psychol. 2020 Feb 20;11:244. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00244. eCollection 2020.
9
Causal Illusions in the Service of Political Attitudes in Spain and the United Kingdom.西班牙和英国政治态度中的因果错觉
Front Psychol. 2018 Jun 28;9:1033. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01033. eCollection 2018.
10
Asking the right questions about the psychology of human inquiry: Nine open challenges.探讨人类探究心理学的正确问题:九大开放性挑战。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2019 Oct;26(5):1548-1587. doi: 10.3758/s13423-018-1470-5.