Uncertainty and dependency in causal inference

Expanding the Space of Cognitive Science - Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2011

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 1418-1423

  Carroll, Christopher D ^a   Cheng, Patricia W ^a   Lu, Hongjing ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

associative models; Bayesian models; causal inference; causal reasoning; uncertainty

Indexed keywords

ASSOCIATIVE MODELS; BAYESIAN MODELLING; CAUSAL INFERENCES; CAUSAL INFLUENCES; CAUSAL REASONING; CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS; MODEL APPROXIMATES; MODEL USE; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 84929486551     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (15)

1. Carroll, C. D., Cheng, P. W., & Lu, H. (2010). Uncertainty in causal inference: The case of retrospective revaluation. In S. Ohlsson, & R. Catrambone (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.
2. Cheng, P. W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104, 367-405.
3. Courville, A. C., Daw, N. D., Gordon, G. J., & Touretzky, D. S. (2003). Model uncertainty in classical conditioning. In S. Thrun, S. L, & B. Schoelkopf (Eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 16. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Denniston, J. C., Savastano, H. I., & Miller, R. R. (2001). The extended comparator hypothesis: Learning by contiguity, responding by relative strength. In R. R. Mowrer, & S. B. Klein, Handbook of contemporary learning theories. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. Dickinson, A., & Burke, J. (1996). Within-compound associations mediate the retrospective revaluation of causality judgments. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49B (1), 60-80.
6. Griffiths, T. L., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2005). Structureand strength in causal induction. Cognitive Psychology, 51, 334-384.
7. Hull, C. L. (1952). A behavior system: An introduction to behavior theory concerning the individual organism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
8. Kruschke, J. K. (2008). Bayesian approaches to associative learning: From passive to active learning. Learning & Behavior, 36 (3), 210-226.
9. Lu, H., Rojas, R. R., Becker, T., & Yuille, A. (2008). Sequential causal learning in humans and rats. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.
10. Miller, R. R., & Matzel, L. D. (1988). The comparator hypothesis: A response rule for the expression of associations. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 2). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
11. 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 research and theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
12. Sobel, D. M., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Gopnik, A. (2004). Children's causal inferences from indirect evidence: Backwards blocking and Bayesian reasoning in preschoolers. Cognitive Science, 28, 303-333.
13. Stout, S. C., & Miller, R. R. (2007). Sometimes-competing cue retrieval (SOCR): A formalization of the comparator hypothesis. Psychological Review, 114 (3), 759-783.
14. Van Hamme, L. J., & Wasserman, E. A. (1994). Cue competition in causality judgments: The role of nonpresentation of compound stimulus elements. Learning & Motivation, 25, 127-151.
15. Wasserman, E. A., & Castro, L. (2005). Surprise and change: Variations in the strength of present and absent cues in causal learning. Learning & Behavior, 33 (2), 131-146.