Time as a guide to cause

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 451-460

  Lagnado, David A ^a   Sloman, Steven A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Causal learning; Covariation; Intervention; Temporal order

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER; HUMAN; LEARNING; MEMORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; TIME;

COMPUTERS; HUMANS; LEARNING; MEMORY; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; TIME;

EID: 33745084877     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.3.451     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Buehner, M. J., & May, J. (2002). Knowledge mediates the timeframe of covariation assessment in human causal induction. Thinking and Reasoning, 8, 269-295.
2. Buehner, M. J., & May, J. (2003). Rethinking temporal contiguity and the judgment of causality: Effects of prior knowledge, experience, and reinforcement procedure. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 865-890.
3. Cheng, P. W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104, 367-405.
4. Glymour, C. (2003). Learning, prediction, and causal Bayes nets. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 43-48.
5. Gopnik, A., Glymour, C., Sobel, D. M., Schulz, L. E., Kushnir, T., & Danks, D. (2004). A theory of causal learning in children: Causal maps and Bayes nets. Psychological Review, 111, 1-31.
6. Griffiths, T. L. (2005). Causes, coincidences, and theories. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Stanford University.
7. Griffiths, T. L., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2005). Structure and strength in causal induction. Cognitive Psychology, 51, 354-384.
8. Hagmayer, Y., & Waldmann, M. R. (2002). How temporal assumptions influence causal judgments. Memory & Cognition, 30, 1128-1137.
9. Hume, D. (1748). An enquiry concerning human understanding. Oxford, England: Clarendon.
10. Johnson, H. (2004). Drugs and crime: A study of incarcerated female offenders (Research and public policy series, No. 63). Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology.
11. Lagnado, D. A., & Sloman, S. A. (2002). Learning causal structure. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 560-565). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Lagnado, D. A., & Sloman, S. A. (2004). The advantage of timely intervention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 856-876.
13. Lagnado, D. A., Waldmann, M. R., Hagmayer, Y., & Sloman, S. A. (2006). Beyond covariation: Cues to causal structure. In A. Gopnik & L. Schultz, (Eds.), Causal learning: Psychology, philosophy, and computation. New York: Oxford University Press.
14. McKim, V., & Turner, S. (1997). Causality in crisis? Statistical methods and the search for causal knowledge in the social sciences. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
15. Michotte, A. E. (1963). The perception of causality. London: Methuen & Co. (Original work published in 1946)
16. Osman, M., & Heyes, C. (2005). Practice doesn't always make perfect: Goal induced decrements in the accuracy of action- and observation-based problem solving. Proceedings of the Twenty-seventh Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1690-1695). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Pearl, J. (2000). Causality. Cambridge. England: Cambridge University Press.
18. Scheines, R., Easterday, M., & Danks. D. (2006). Teaching the normative theory of causal reasoning. In A. Gopnik, & L. Schultz (Eds.), Causal learning: Psychology, philosophy, and computation. New York: Oxford University Press.
19. Shanks, D. R. (2004). Judging covariation and causation. In D. Koehler & N. Harvey (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 220-239). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
20. Shanks, D. R., Pearson, S. M., & Dickinson, A. (1989). Temporal contiguity and the judgment of causality by human subjects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Section B, 41, 139-159.
21. Shultz, T. R. (1982). Rules of causal attribution. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 47(Serial No. 194).
22. Sobel, D. M., & Kushnir, T. (2003). Interventions do not solely benefit causal learning. Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp. 1100-1105). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Sobel, D. M., & Kushnir, T. (in press). The importance of decision demands in causal learning from interventions. Memory & Cognition.
24. Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., & Scheines, R. (1993). Causation, prediction, and search. New York: Springer-Verlag.
25. Stack, S., & Gundlach, J. (1992). The effect of country music on suicide. Social Forces, 71, 211-218.
26. Steyvers, M., Tenenbaum, J. B., Wagenmakers, E. J., & Blum, B. (2003). Inferring causal networks from observations and interventions. Cognitive Science, 27, 453-489.
27. Tenenbaum, J. B., & Griffiths, T. L. (2003). Theory-based causal inference. In S. Becker, S. Thrun, & K. Obermayer (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems (Vol. 15, pp. 35-42). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Waldmann, M. R. (1996). Knowledge-based causal induction. In D. R. Shanks, K. J. Holyoak, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 34. pp. 47-88). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
29. Waldmann, M. R., & Hagmayer, Y. (2001). Estimating causal strength: The role of structural knowledge and processing effort. Cognition, 82, 27-58.
30. 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.