当前位置: X-MOL 学术Psychological Review › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
A counterfactual simulation model of causal judgments for physical events.
Psychological Review ( IF 5.4 ) Pub Date : 2021-06-07 , DOI: 10.1037/rev0000281
Tobias Gerstenberg 1 , Noah D Goodman 1 , David A Lagnado 2 , Joshua B Tenenbaum 3
Affiliation  

How do people make causal judgments about physical events? We introduce the counterfactual simulation model (CSM) which predicts causal judgments in physical settings by comparing what actually happened with what would have happened in relevant counterfactual situations. The CSM postulates different aspects of causation that capture the extent to which a cause made a difference to whether and how the outcome occurred, and whether the cause was sufficient and robust. We test the CSM in several experiments in which participants make causal judgments about dynamic collision events. A preliminary study establishes a very close quantitative mapping between causal and counterfactual judgments. Experiment 1 demonstrates that counterfactuals are necessary for explaining causal judgments. Participants' judgments differed dramatically between pairs of situations in which what actually happened was identical, but where what would have happened differed. Experiment 2 features multiple candidate causes and shows that participants' judgments are sensitive to different aspects of causation. The CSM provides a better fit to participants' judgments than a heuristic model which uses features based on what actually happened. We discuss how the CSM can be used to model the semantics of different causal verbs, how it captures related concepts such as physical support, and how its predictions extend beyond the physical domain. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译:

物理事件因果判断的反事实模拟模型。

人们如何对物理事件做出因果判断?我们介绍了反事实模拟模型 (CSM),该模型通过比较实际发生的情况与相关反事实情况下会发生的情况来预测物理环境中的因果判断。CSM 假设了因果关系的不同方面,以捕捉原因对结果是否发生以及如何发生以及该原因是否充分和有力的影响程度。我们在几个实验中测试 CSM,在这些实验中,参与者对动态碰撞事件做出因果判断。一项初步研究在因果判断和反事实判断之间建立了非常接近的定量映射。实验 1 表明反事实对于解释因果判断是必要的。参与者的 在实际发生的情况相同但会发生的情况不同的情况下,判断在成对情况之间存在显着差异。实验 2 具有多个候选原因,表明参与者的判断对因果关系的不同方面都很敏感。与使用基于实际发生情况的特征的启发式模型相比,CSM 更适合参与者的判断。我们讨论了 CSM 如何用于建模不同因果动词的语义,它如何捕获相关概念,例如物理支持,以及它的预测如何扩展到物理域之外。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA,保留所有权利)。实验 2 具有多个候选原因,表明参与者的判断对因果关系的不同方面都很敏感。与使用基于实际发生情况的特征的启发式模型相比,CSM 更适合参与者的判断。我们讨论了 CSM 如何用于建模不同因果动词的语义,它如何捕获相关概念,例如物理支持,以及它的预测如何扩展到物理域之外。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA,保留所有权利)。实验 2 具有多个候选原因,表明参与者的判断对因果关系的不同方面很敏感。与使用基于实际发生情况的特征的启发式模型相比,CSM 更适合参与者的判断。我们讨论了 CSM 如何用于建模不同因果动词的语义,它如何捕获相关概念,例如物理支持,以及它的预测如何扩展到物理域之外。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA,保留所有权利)。它如何捕捉相关概念,如物理支持,以及它的预测如何扩展到物理领域之外。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA,保留所有权利)。它如何捕捉相关概念,如物理支持,以及它的预测如何扩展到物理领域之外。(PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2021 APA,保留所有权利)。
更新日期:2021-06-07
down
wechat
bug