How contrast situations affect the assignment of causality in symmetric physical settings
How contrast situations affect the assignment of causality in symmetric physical settings
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01497
复制
发表时间：
2015-01-08
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Bender, Andrea
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Beller, Sieghard;Bender, Andrea
在确定一个物理事件的主要原因时，人们通常认为对称物理关系中的两个实体中的一个对产生因果效应比另一个更重要。在一项广泛的调查中（Bender和Beller，2011），我们记录了不同类型的物理事件的权重效应，并发现它们的方向和强度取决于各种因素。在这里，我们专注于其中之一：添加一个对比情况，而正式无关的前景的因素之一，从而框架的任务，在一个特定的方式。在两个实验中，我们通过使用不同的刺激材料（实验1），通过应用不同的反应格式来引出因果分配，模拟评级量表而不是强迫选择决定（实验2），以及通过引出对物理事件的解释（实验2），来概括和验证我们先前的发现。结果一般确认两种响应格式的对比效果，但是，效果更明显的力选择格式比评级格式。人们倾向于在他们的解释中提到给定的对比，这验证了我们的操纵。最后，人们的因果分配反映在类型的解释中，对比和属性的解释与有偏见的因果分配，而关系的解释与无偏见的分配。在讨论中，我们提出了这些对比效应是否构成因果推理中的偏见的规范性问题。
In determining the prime cause of a physical event, people often weight one of two entities in a symmetric physical relation as more important for bringing about the causal effect than the other. In a broad survey (Bender and Beller, 2011), we documented such weighting effects for different kinds of physical events and found that their direction and strength depended on a variety of factors. Here, we focus on one of those: adding a contrast situation that while being formally irrelevant foregrounds one of the factors and thus frames the task in a specific way. In two experiments, we generalize and validate our previous findings by using different stimulus material On Experiment 1), by applying a different response format to elicit causal assignments, an analog rating scale instead of a forced-choice decision On Experiment 2), and by eliciting explanations for the physical events in question On both Experiments). The results generally confirm the contrast effects for both response formats; however, the effects were more pronounced with the force-choice format than with the rating format. People tended to refer to the given contrast in their explanations, which validates our manipulation. Finally, people's causal assignments are reflected in the type of explanation given in that contrast and property explanations were associated with biased causal assignments, whereas relational explanations were associated with unbiased assignments. In the discussion, we pick up the normative questions of whether or not these contrast effects constitute a bias in causal reasoning.