Causal judgment from contingency information: Relation between subjective reports and individual tendencies in judgment

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 415-426

  White, Peter A ^a,b  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; INDIVIDUALIZATION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PREDICTION; STATE DEPENDENT LEARNING; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE;

EID: 0034044407     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03198557     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. ALLAN, L. G. (1993). Human contingency judgements: Rule based or associative? Psychological Bulletin, 114, 435-448.
2. ANDERSON, J. R., & SHEU, C.-F. (1995). Causal inferences as perceptual judgments. Memory & Cognition, 23, 510-524.
3. ARKES, H. R., & HARKNESS, A. R. (1983). Estimates of contingency between two dichotomous variables. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 117-135.
4. CHAPMAN, G. B. (1991). Trial order affects cue interaction in contingency judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 837-854.
5. CHAPMAN, G. B., & ROBBINS, S. J. (1990). Cue interaction in human contingency judgment. Memory & Cognition, 18, 537-545.
6. CHENG, P. W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104, 367-405.
7. CHENG, P. W., & NOVICK, L. R. (1990). A probabilistic contrast model of causal induction. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 58, 545-567.
8. CHENG, P. W., & NOVICK, L. R. (1992). Covariation in natural causal induction. Psychological Review, 99, 365-382.
9. JENKINS, H. M., & WARD, W. C. (1965). Judgement of contingency between responses and outcomes. Psychological Monographs, 79 (Whole No. 10).
10. KAO, S.-F., & WASSERMAN, E. A. (1993). Assessment of an information integration account of contingency judgment with examination of subjective cell importance and method of information presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 19, 1363-1386.
11. MARR, D. (1982). Vision. New York: Freeman.
12. MCKENZIE, C. R. M. (1994). The accuracy of intuitive judgment strategies: Covariation assessment and Bayesian inference. Cognitive Psychology, 26, 209-239.
13. RESCORLA, R. A., & WAGNER, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations on the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current research and theory (pp. 64-99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
14. SHANKS, D. R. (1993). Human instrumental learning: A critical review of data and theory. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 319-354.
15. SHANKS, D. R. (1995). The psychology of associative learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. SHANKS, D. R., & DICKINSON, A. (1987). Associative accounts of causality judgement. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 21, pp. 229-261). New York: Academic Press.
17. SHANKS, D. R., & LOPEZ, F. J. (1996). Causal order does not affect cue selection in human associative learning. Memory & Cognition, 24, 511-522.
18. SHANKS, D. R., LOPEZ, F. J., DARBY, R. J., & DICKINSON, A. (1996). Distinguishing associative and probabilistic contrast theories of human contingency judgment. In D. R. Shanks, K. J. Holyoak, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Vol. 34. Causal learning (pp. 265-311). San Diego: Academic Press.
19. SIEGEL, S. (1956). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. London: McGraw-Hill.
20. TABACHNIK, B. G., & FIDELL, L. S. (1989). Using multivariate statistics (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
21. VAN HAMME, L. J., & WASSERMAN, E. A. (1994). Cue competition in causality judgments: The role of nonrepresentation of compound stimulus elements. Learning & Motivation, 25, 127-151.
22. WALDMANN, M. R., & HOLYOAK, K. J. (1992). Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: Asymmetries in cue competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 222-236.
23. WARD, W. C., & JENKINS, H. M. (1965). The display of information and the judgment of contingency. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 19, 231-241.
24. WASSERMAN, E. A., KAO, S.-F., VAN HAMME, L. J., KATAGIRI, M., & YOUNG, M. E. (1996). Causation and association. In D. R. Shanks, K. J. Holyoak, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), The psychology oflearning and motivation: Vol. 34. Causal learning (pp. 207-264). San Diego: Academic Press.
25. WHITE, P. A. (1998). Causal judgement: Use of different types of contingency information as confirmatory and disconfirmatory. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 10, 131-170.