Skip to main content
Research Article

The Origin of Illusory Correlations

Biased Judgments Converge With Inferences, Not With Biased Memory

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000444

Abstract. If the distributions of two binary variables are skewed, people erroneously perceive a correlation even if the variables are actually uncorrelated. Specifically, people perceive a correlation between the variables’ infrequent (vs. frequent) levels. While such systematic Illusory Correlations (ICs) can account for important phenomena, including erroneous stereotypes linking minority groups with infrequent attributes, the theoretical explanation is still a matter of debate. As proposed in the distinctiveness-based account, ICs arise due to a memory advantage for infrequent events. Alternatively, it has been proposed that ICs reflect ad hoc inferences from univariate base rates. In two experiments, we tested the accounts’ predictions using a standard IC paradigm followed by (1) a contingency judgment task, asking participants to directly report contingencies, and (2) a trial-by-trial source assignment task of group membership and attribute. Bayesian-hierarchical model analysis revealed that ICs in contingency judgments were positively correlated to ad hoc inferences, but uncorrelated to exemplar memory in participants’ source assignments. Moreover, inducing a focus on infrequent events improved memory for distinct events, but did not result in stronger ICs. Thus, our results support the explanation of ICs as ad hoc inferences from base rates, rather than a memory advantage for distinctive item combinations.

References

  • Allan, L. G. (1993). Human contingency judgments: Rule based or associative? Psychological Bulletin, 114, 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.114.3.435 First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle Scholar

  • Arnold, N. R., Bayen, U. J., Kuhlmann, B. G., & Vaterrodt, B. (2013). Hierarchical modeling of contingency-based source monitoring: A test of the probability-matching account. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 326–333. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0342-7 First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle Scholar

  • Batchelder, W. H., & Riefer, D. M. (1990). Multinomial processing models of source monitoring. Psychological Review, 97, 548–564. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.97.4.548 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bayen, U. J., Murnane, K., & Erdfelder, E. (1996). Source discrimination, item detection, and multinomial models of source monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 197–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.22.1.197 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Bulli, F., & Primi, C. (2006). Illusory correlation and cognitive processes: A multinomial model of source-monitoring. Review of Psychology, 13, 95–102. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Chapman, L. J. (1967). Illusory correlation in observational report. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 151–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(67)80066-5 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Eder, A. B., Fiedler, K., & Hamm-Eder, S. (2011). Illusory correlations revisited: The role of pseudocontingencies and working-memory capacity. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 517–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2010.509917 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146 First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle Scholar

  • Fiedler, K. (1991). The tricky nature of skewed frequency tables: An information loss account of distinctiveness-based illusory correlations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 24–36. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.1.24 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Fiedler, K., & Freytag, P. (2004). Pseudocontingencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 453–467. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.4.453 First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle Scholar

  • Fiedler, K., Freytag, P., & Meiser, T. (2009). Pseudocontingencies: An integrative account of an intriguing cognitive illusion. Psychological Review, 116, 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014480 First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle Scholar

  • Fiedler, K., Kutzner, F., & Vogel, T. (2013). Pseudocontingencies: Logically unwarranted but smart inferences. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 324–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721413480171 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hamilton, D. L., Dugan, P. M., & Trolier, T. K. (1985). The formation of stereotypic beliefs: Further evidence for distinctiveness-based illusory correlations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.1.5 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hamilton, D. L., & Gifford, R. K. (1976). Illusory correlation in interpersonal perception: A cognitive basis of stereotypic judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 392–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(76)80006-6 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Hautzinger, M., Keller, F., & Kühner, C. (2006). Beck Depressions-Inventar (BDI-II) [Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II)]. Frankfurt, Germany: Harcourt Test Services. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Heck, D. W., Arnold, N. R., & Arnold, D. (2018). TreeBUGS: An R package for hierarchical multinomial-processing-tree modeling. Behavior Research Methods, 50, 264–284. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0869-7 First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle Scholar

  • Hu, X., & Batchelder, W. H. (1994). The statistical analysis of general processing tree models with the EM algorithm. Psychometrika, 59, 21–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294263 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Jenkins, H. M., & Ward, W. C. (1965). Judgment of contingency between responses and outcomes. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 79, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093874 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Johnson, C., & Mullen, B. (1994). Evidence for the accessibility of paired distinctiveness in distinctiveness-based illusory correlation in stereotyping. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 65–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167294201006 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Keller, J., & Bless, H. (2008). When positive and negative expectancies disrupt performance: Regulatory focus as a catalyst. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 187–212. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.452 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Klauer, K. C. (2010). Hierarchical multinomial processing tree models: A latent-trait approach. Psychometrika, 75, 70–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11336-009-9141-0 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Klauer, K. C., & Meiser, T. (2000). A source-monitoring analysis of illusory correlations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1074–1093. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672002611005 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kutzner, F., Vogel, T., Freytag, P., & Fiedler, K. (2011). A robust classic: Illusory correlations are maintained under extended operant learning. Experimental Psychology, 58, 443–453. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000112 First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar

  • McGarty, C., Haslam, S. A., Turner, J. C., & Oakes, P. J. (1993). Illusory correlation as accentuation of actual intercategory difference: Evidence for the effect with minimal stimulus information. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 391–410. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420230406 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Meiser, T. (2003). Effects of processing strategy on episodic memory and contingency learning in group stereotype formation. Social Cognition, 21, 121–156. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.21.2.121.21318 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Meiser, T., & Hewstone, M. (2004). Cognitive processes in stereotype formation: The role of correct contingency learning for biased group judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 599–614. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.599 First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle Scholar

  • Meiser, T., & Hewstone, M. (2010). Contingency learning and stereotype formation: Illusory and spurious correlations revisited. European Review of Social Psychology, 21, 285–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2010.543308 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Mullen, B., & Johnson, C. (1990). Distinctiveness-based illusory correlations and stereotyping: A meta-analytic integration. British Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 11–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1990.tb00883.x First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ochsner, K. N. (2000). Are affective events richly recollected or simply familiar? The experience and process of recognizing feelings past. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 242–261. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.129.2.242 First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle Scholar

  • Peeters, G., & Czapinski, J. (1990). Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations: The distinction between affective and informational negativity effects. European Review of Social Psychology, 1, 33–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779108401856 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rothbart, M. (1981). Memory processes and social beliefs. In D. L. HamiltonEd., Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 145–181). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Sassenberg, K., Ellemers, N., & Scheepers, D. (2012). The attraction of social power: The influence of construing power as opportunity versus responsibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 550–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.11.008 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Smedslund, J. (1953). The problem of “what is learned?”. Psychological Review, 60, 157–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057364 First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle Scholar

  • Vogel, T., & Kutzner, F. (2017). Pseudocontingencies in consumer choice: Preference for prevalent product categories decreases with decreasing set quality. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30, 1193–1205. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2034 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vogel, T., Kutzner, F., Fiedler, K., & Freytag, P. (2013). How majority members become associated with rare attributes: Ecological correlations in stereotype formation. Social Cognition, 31, 427–442. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco_2012_1002 First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vogel, T., Kutzner, F., Freytag, P., & Fiedler, K. (2014). Inferring correlations: From exemplars to categories. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1316–1322. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0586-5 First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle Scholar