Judging the Importance of Constant and Variable Candidate Causes: A Test of the Power PC Theory

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology

Volumn 51, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 65-84

  Vallée Tourangeau, Frédéric ^a   Murphy, Robin A ^a   Drew, Susan ^a   Baker, A G ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE   (United Kingdom)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347964806     PISSN: 02724987     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/713755745     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Allan, L.G., & Jenkins, H.M. (1980). The judgment of contingency and the nature of response alternatives. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34, 1-11.
2. Allan, L.G., & Jenkins, H. (1983). The effect of representations of binary variables on judgment of influence. Learning and Motivation, 14, 381-405.
3. Alloy, L.B., & Abramson, L.Y. (1979). Judgment of contingency in depressed and non-depressed students: Sadder but wiser? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 441-485.
4. Baker, A.G., Berbrier, M.W., & Vallée-Tourangeau, F. (1989). Judgments of a 2 X 2 contingency table: Sequential processing and the learning curve. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41B, 65-97.
5. Baker, A.G., Murphy, R. A., & Vallée-Tourangeau, F. (1996). Associative and normative models of causal induction: Reacting to versus understanding cause. In D.R. Shanks, K.J. Holyoak, & D.L. Medin (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 34 (pp. 1-45). San Diego: Academic Press.
6. Baron, J. (1994). Thinking and deciding (second edition). New York: Cambridge University Press.
7. Chapman, G.B., & Robbins, S.I. (1990). Cue interaction in human contingency judgment. Memory & Cognition, 18, 537-545.
8. Chatlosh, D.L., Neunaber, D.J., & Wasserman, E.A. (1985). Response-outcome contingency: Behavioral and judgmental effects of appetitive and aversive outcomes with college students. Learning and Motivation, 16, 1-34.
9. Cheng, P.W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104, 367-405.
10. Cheng, P.W., & Novick, L.R. (1992). Covariation in natural induction. Psychological Review, 99, 365-382.
11. Dickinson, A., Shanks, D.R., & Evenden, J.L. (1984). Judgment of act-outcome contingency: The role of selective attribution. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 29-50.
12. Jenkins, H.H., & Ward, W.C. (1965). Judgment of contingency between responses and outcomes. Psychological Monographs, 79.
13. Klayman, J., & Ha, Y.-H. (1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review, 94, 211-228.
14. Pearce, J.M. (1987). A model for stimulus generalization in Pavlovian conditioning. Psychological Review, 94, 61-73.
15. Pearce, J.M., & Hall, G. (1980). A model for Pavlovian learning: Variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli. Psychological Review, 87, 532-552.
16. Rescorla, R.A., & Wagner, A.R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and non-reinforcement. In A.H. Black & W.F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current theory and research (pp. 6-4-99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
17. Shanks, D.R, (1985). Continuous monitoring of human contingency judgments across trials. Memory & Cognition, 13, 158-167.
18. Shanks, D.R. (1987). Acquisition functions in causality judgment. Learning and Motivation, 18, 147-166.
19. 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 (pp. 265-311). San Diego: Academic Press.
20. Sutherland, S. (1992). Irrationality. London: Penguin.
21. Vallée-Tourangeau, F., Baker, A.G., & Mercier, P. (1994). Discounting in causality and covariation judgments. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47B, 151-171.
22. Vallée-Tourangeau, F., Drew, S., & Murphy, R.A. (in preparation). Base rate biases in causal induction.
23. Wasserman, E.A., Elek, S.M., Chatlosh, D.L., & Baker, A.G. (1993). Rating causal relations: Role of probability in judgments of response-outcome contingency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19, 174-188.