Conservative forgetful scholars: How people learn causal structure through sequences of interventions

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 41, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 708-731

  Bramley, Neil R ^a   Lagnado, David A ^a   Speekenbrink, Maarten ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Active; Bayesian; Causal; Learning; Structure

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BAYES THEOREM; COMPUTER; CONCEPT FORMATION; DECISION MAKING; GAMBLING; HUMAN; INFORMATION SCIENCE; LEARNING; MEMORY; MIDDLE AGED; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGIC TEST; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BAYES THEOREM; COMPUTERS; CONCEPT FORMATION; GAMBLING; HUMANS; INFORMATION THEORY; JUDGMENT; LEARNING; MEMORY; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84939636786     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000061     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Baddeley, A. (1992, January 31). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559. doi:10.1126/science.1736359
2. Baron, J. (2005). Rationality and intelligence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
3. Baron, J., Beattie, J., & Hershey, J. C. (1988). Heuristics and biases in diagnostic reasoning: II. Congruence, information, and certainty. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 42, 88-110. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(88)90021-0
4. Bruner, J. S., Jolly, A., & Sylva, K. (Eds.). (1976). Play: Its role in development and evolution. New York, NY: Basic Books.
5. Cartwright, N. (1989). Nature's capacities and their measurement. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
6. Cheng, P. W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104, 367-405. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.367
7. th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 343-348). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
8. Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87-114. doi:10.1017/S0140525X01003922
9. rd ed.). New York, NY: Chapman & Hall.
10. st Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (pp. 177-184). Arlington, VA: Association for Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence Press.
11. Edwards, W. (1968). Conservatism in human information processing. In B. Kleinmutz (Ed.), Formal representation of human judgment (pp. 17-52). New York, NY: Wiley.
12. Fernbach, P. M., & Sloman, S. A. (2009). Causal learning with local computations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 678-693. doi:10.1037/a0014928
13. Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M., & the ABC Research Group. (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
14. Good, I. J. (1950). Probability and the weighing of evidence. London, United Kingdom: Griffin.
15. Griffiths, T. L., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2009). Theory-based causal induction. Psychological Review, 116, 661-716. doi:10.1037/a0017201
16. st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 3145-3150). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
17. Gureckis, T., & Markant, D. (2012). Self-directed learning: A cognitive and computational perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 464-481. doi:10.1177/1745691612454304
18. Harman, G. (1986). Change in view: Principles of reasoning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Hartigan, J. A., & Hartigan, P. (1985). The dip test of unimodality. Annals of Statistics, 13, 70-84. doi:10.1214/aos/1176346577
20. Heckerman, D. (1998). A tutorial on learning with Bayesian networks. In M. Jordan (Ed.), Learning in graphical models (pp. 301-354). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Holyoak, K. J., & Cheng, P. W. (2011). Causal learning and inference as a rational process: The new synthesis. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 135-163. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131634
22. Hyafil, L., & Rivest, R. L. (1976). Constructing optimal binary decision trees is NP-complete. Information Processing Letters, 5, 15-17. doi: 10.1016/0020-0190(76)90095-8
23. Jones, M., & Love, B. C. (2011). Bayesian fundamentalism or enlightenment? On the explanatory status and theoretical contributions of Bayesian models of cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34, 169-188. doi:10.1017/S0140525X10003134
24. Krynski, T. R., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2007). The role of causality in judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 430-450. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.430
25. Kuhn, D., & Dean, D. (2005). Is developing scientific thinking all about learning to control variables?. Psychological Science, 16, 866-870. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01628.x
26. th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 560-565). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Lagnado, D. A., & Sloman, S. (2004). The advantage of timely intervention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 856-876. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.30.4.856
28. Lagnado, D. A., & Sloman, S. A. (2006). Time as a guide to cause. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 451-460. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.3.451
29. Lewandowsky, S., & Farrell, S. (2010). Computational modeling in cognition: Principles and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30. Lindley, D. V. (1956). On a measure of the information provided by an experiment. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 27, 986-1005. doi: 10.1214/aoms/1177728069
31. Luce, D. R. (1959). Individual choice behavior. New York, NY: Wiley.
32. nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 248-253). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
33. Marr, D. (1982). Vision. New York, NY: Freeman.
34. Meder, B., & Nelson, J. D. (2012). Information search with situationspecific reward functions. Judgment and Decision Making, 7, 119-148.
35. Meier, K. M., & Blair, M. R. (2013). Waiting and weighting: Information sampling is a balance between efficiency and error-reduction. Cognition, 126, 319-325. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.09.014
36. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97. doi:10.1037/h0043158
37. Nelson, J. D. (2005). Finding useful questions: On Bayesian diagnosticity, probability, impact, and information gain. Psychological Review, 112, 979-999. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.979
38. Nelson, J. D., McKenzie, C. R., Cottrell, G. W., & Sejnowski, T. J. (2010). Experience matters information acquisition optimizes probability gain. Psychological Science, 21, 960-969. doi:10.1177/0956797610372637
39. Osman, M. (2011). Controlling uncertainty: Decision making and learning in complex worlds. Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell.
40. Pearl, J. (1988). Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems. San Francisco, CA: Kaufmann.
41. nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
42. Piaget, J. (2001). The child's conception of physical causality (J. Valsiner, Trans.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. (Original work published 1930)
43. Puterman, M. L. (2009). Markov decision processes: Discrete stochastic dynamic programming. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
44. Schulz, L. (2001, October). "Do-calculus": Adults and preschoolers infer causal structure from patterns of outcomes following interventions. Paper presented at the meeting of the Cognitive Development Society, Virginia Beach, VA.
45. Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6, 461-464. doi:10.1214/aos/1176344136
46. Shanks, D. R. (1995). Is human learning rational? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 48(A), 257-279. doi:10.1080/14640749508401390
47. Shannon, C. E. (2001). A mathematical theory of communication. ACM Sigmobile Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 5, 3-55. doi:10.1145/584091.584093
48. Sloman, S. (2005). Causal models: How people think about the world and its alternatives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
49. Sobel, D. M. (2003). Watch it, do it, or watch it done: The relationship between observation, intervention, and observation of intervention in causal structure learning. Manuscript submitted for publication, Brown University.
50. Sobel, D. M., & Kushnir, T. (2006). The importance of decision making in causal learning from interventions. Memory & Cognition, 34, 411-419. doi:10.3758/BF03193418
51. Sprites, P., Glymour, C., & Scheines, R. (1993). Causation, prediction, and search. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
52. Steyvers, M., Tenenbaum, J. B., Wagenmakers, E., & Blum, B. (2003). Inferring causal networks from observations and interventions. Cognitive Science, 27, 453-489. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2703_6
53. Tenenbaum, J. B., Kemp, C., Griffiths, T. L., & Goodman, N. D. (2011, March 11). How to grow a mind: Statistics, structure, and abstraction. Science, 331, 1279-1285. doi:10.1126/science.1192788
54. Waldmann, M. (2000). Competition among causes but not effects in predictive and diagnostic learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 53-76. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.26.1.53
55. Waldmann, M., & Holyoak, K. J. (1992). Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: Asymmetries in cue competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 222-236. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.121.2.222
56. Wixted, J. T. (2004). The psychology and neuroscience of forgetting. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 235-269. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych .55.090902.141555
57. Woodward, J. (2003). Making things happen: A theory of causal explanation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.