The power PC theory and causal powers: Comment on Cheng (1997) and Novick and Cheng (2004)

Psychological Review

Volumn 112, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 675-684

  White, Peter A ^a,b  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Causal judgment; Causal powers; Power PC theory

Indexed keywords

COGNITION; HUMAN; LOGIC; MOTIVATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REVIEW; STATISTICAL MODEL;

COGNITION; HUMANS; LOGIC; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MOTIVATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY;

EID: 23844555499     PISSN: 0033295X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.112.3.675     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Ahn, W., & Kalish, C. W. (2000). The role of mechanism beliefs in causal reasoning. In F. C. Keil & R. A. Wilson (Eds.), Explanation and cognition (pp. 199-225). London: MIT Press.
2. Ahn, W., Kalish, C. W., Medin, D. L., & Gelman, S. A. (1995). The role of covariation versus mechanism information in causal attribution. Cognition, 54, 299-352.
3. Cheng, P. W. (1993). Separating causal laws from causal facts: Pressing the limits of statistical relevance. In D. L. Medin (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 30, pp. 215-264). New York: Academic Press.
4. Cheng, P. W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104, 367-405.
5. Ducasse, C. J. (1965). Mind, matter and bodies. In J. R. Smythies (Ed.), Brain and mind (pp. 81-96). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
6. Fletcher, G. J. O. (1984). Psychology and common sense. American Psychologist, 39, 203-213.
7. Harré, R., & Madden, E. H. (1975). Causal powers: A theory of natural necessity. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
8. Jenkins, H. M., & Ward, W. C. (1965). Judgement of contingency between responses and outcomes. Psychological Monographs, 79(Whole No. 10).
9. Johnson, J. T. (1989). Disposition prevalence and causal strength: The effect of prevalence on the estimated causal importance of conjunctive dispositions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 36-58.
10. Johnson, J. T. (2001). On weakening the strongest link: Attributions and intervention strategies for behavior change. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 406-420.
11. Johnson, J. T., Boyd, K. R., & Magnani, P. S. (1994). Causal reasoning in the attribution of rare and common events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 229-242.
12. Johnson, J. T., Long, D. L., & Robinson, M. D. (2001). Is a cause conceptualized as a generative force? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 398-412.
13. Kneale, W. (1974). Natural laws and contrary-to-fact conditionals. In T. L. Beauchamp (Ed.), Philosophical problems of causation. Encino, CA: Dickenson.
14. McKenzie, C. R. M. (1994). The accuracy of intuitive judgment strategies: Covariation assessment and Bayesian inference. Cognitive Psychology, 26, 209-239.
15. Mendelson, R., & Shultz, T. R. (1976). Covariation and temporal contiguity as principles of causal inference in young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 22, 408-412.
16. Michotte, A. (1963). The perception of causality. New York: Basic Books.
17. Novick, L. R., & Cheng, P. W. (2004). Assessing interactive causal influence. Psychological Review, 111, 455-485.
18. Ross, M., & Fletcher, G. J. O. (1985). Attribution and social perception. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 73-122). New York: Random House.
19. Shultz, T. R. (1982). Rules of causal attribution. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 47, 1-51.
20. Shultz, T. R., Fisher, G. W., Pratt, C. C., & Rulf, S. (1986). Selection of causal rules. Child Development, 57, 143-152.
21. Siegler, R. S. (1975). Defining the locus of developmental differences in children's causal reasoning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 20, 512-525.
22. Siegler, R. S., & Liebert, R. M. (1974). Effects of contiguity, regularity, and age on children's causal inferences. Developmental Psychology, 10, 574-579.
23. Taylor, R. (1966). Action and purpose. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
24. Thagard, P. (2000). Explaining disease: Correlations, causes, and mechanisms. In F. C. Keil & R. A. Wilson (Eds.), Explanation and cognition (pp. 255-276). London: MIT Press.
25. Ward, W. C., & Jenkins, H. M. (1965). The display of information and the judgment of contingency. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 19, 231-241.
26. White, P. A. (1984). A model of the layperson as pragmatist. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 333-348.
27. White, P. A. (1989). A theory of causal processing. British Journal of Psychology, 80, 431-454.
28. White, P. A. (1992). Causal powers, causal questions, and the place of regularity information in causal attribution. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 161-188.
29. White, P. A. (1993). Psychological metaphysics. London: Routledge.
30. White, P. A. (1995). The understanding of causation and the production of action: From infancy to adulthood. Hove, England: Erlbaum.
31. White, P. A. (2000). Causal judgment from contingency information: The interpretation of factors common to all instances. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1083-1102.
32. White, P. A. (2004). Judgement of two causal candidates from contingency information: Effects of relative prevalence of the two causes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 57(A), 961-991.
33. Young, M. E. (1995). On the origin of personal causal theories. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 83-104.
34. Cheng, P. W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104, 367-405.
35. Cheng, P. W., & Novick, L. R. (2005). Constraints and nonconstraints in causal learning: A reply to White (2005) and to Luhmann and Ahn (2005). Psychological Review, 112, 694-709.
36. White, P. A. (1999). Towards a causal realist theory of causal understanding. American Journal of Psychology, 112, 605-642.
37. White, P. A. (2000). Causal judgment from contingency information: The interpretation of factors common to all instances. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1083-1102.