Cargando…
Explaining Away, Augmentation, and the Assumption of Independence
In reasoning about situations in which several causes lead to a common effect, a much studied and yet still not well-understood inference is that of explaining away. Assuming that the causes contribute independently to the effect, if we learn that the effect is present, then this increases the proba...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7670039/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33224043 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.502751 |
_version_ | 1783610658115289088 |
---|---|
author | Cruz, Nicole Hahn, Ulrike Fenton, Norman Lagnado, David |
author_facet | Cruz, Nicole Hahn, Ulrike Fenton, Norman Lagnado, David |
author_sort | Cruz, Nicole |
collection | PubMed |
description | In reasoning about situations in which several causes lead to a common effect, a much studied and yet still not well-understood inference is that of explaining away. Assuming that the causes contribute independently to the effect, if we learn that the effect is present, then this increases the probability that one or more of the causes are present. But if we then learn that a particular cause is present, this cause “explains” the presence of the effect, and the probabilities of the other causes decrease again. People tend to show this explaining away effect in their probability judgments, but to a lesser extent than predicted by the causal structure of the situation. We investigated further the conditions under which explaining away is observed. Participants estimated the probability of a cause, given the presence or the absence of another cause, for situations in which the effect was either present or absent, and the evidence about the effect was either certain or uncertain. Responses were compared to predictions obtained using Bayesian network modeling as well as a sensitivity analysis of the size of normative changes in probability under different information conditions. One of the conditions investigated: when there is certainty that the effect is absent, is special because under the assumption of causal independence, the probabilities of the causes remain invariant, that is, there is no normative explaining away or augmentation. This condition is therefore especially diagnostic of people’s reasoning about common-effect structures. The findings suggest that, alongside earlier explanations brought forward in the literature, explaining away may occur less often when the causes are assumed to interact in their contribution to the effect, and when the normative size of the probability change is not large enough to be subjectively meaningful. Further, people struggled when given evidence against negative evidence, resembling a double negation effect. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7670039 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76700392020-11-20 Explaining Away, Augmentation, and the Assumption of Independence Cruz, Nicole Hahn, Ulrike Fenton, Norman Lagnado, David Front Psychol Psychology In reasoning about situations in which several causes lead to a common effect, a much studied and yet still not well-understood inference is that of explaining away. Assuming that the causes contribute independently to the effect, if we learn that the effect is present, then this increases the probability that one or more of the causes are present. But if we then learn that a particular cause is present, this cause “explains” the presence of the effect, and the probabilities of the other causes decrease again. People tend to show this explaining away effect in their probability judgments, but to a lesser extent than predicted by the causal structure of the situation. We investigated further the conditions under which explaining away is observed. Participants estimated the probability of a cause, given the presence or the absence of another cause, for situations in which the effect was either present or absent, and the evidence about the effect was either certain or uncertain. Responses were compared to predictions obtained using Bayesian network modeling as well as a sensitivity analysis of the size of normative changes in probability under different information conditions. One of the conditions investigated: when there is certainty that the effect is absent, is special because under the assumption of causal independence, the probabilities of the causes remain invariant, that is, there is no normative explaining away or augmentation. This condition is therefore especially diagnostic of people’s reasoning about common-effect structures. The findings suggest that, alongside earlier explanations brought forward in the literature, explaining away may occur less often when the causes are assumed to interact in their contribution to the effect, and when the normative size of the probability change is not large enough to be subjectively meaningful. Further, people struggled when given evidence against negative evidence, resembling a double negation effect. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7670039/ /pubmed/33224043 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.502751 Text en Copyright © 2020 Cruz, Hahn, Fenton and Lagnado. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Cruz, Nicole Hahn, Ulrike Fenton, Norman Lagnado, David Explaining Away, Augmentation, and the Assumption of Independence |
title | Explaining Away, Augmentation, and the Assumption of Independence |
title_full | Explaining Away, Augmentation, and the Assumption of Independence |
title_fullStr | Explaining Away, Augmentation, and the Assumption of Independence |
title_full_unstemmed | Explaining Away, Augmentation, and the Assumption of Independence |
title_short | Explaining Away, Augmentation, and the Assumption of Independence |
title_sort | explaining away, augmentation, and the assumption of independence |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7670039/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33224043 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.502751 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cruznicole explainingawayaugmentationandtheassumptionofindependence AT hahnulrike explainingawayaugmentationandtheassumptionofindependence AT fentonnorman explainingawayaugmentationandtheassumptionofindependence AT lagnadodavid explainingawayaugmentationandtheassumptionofindependence |