The influence of virtual sample size on confidence and causal-strength judgments
- PMID: 19210088
- DOI: 10.1037/a0013972
The influence of virtual sample size on confidence and causal-strength judgments
Abstract
The authors investigated whether confidence in causal judgments varies with virtual sample size--the frequency of cases in which the outcome is (a) absent before the introduction of a generative cause or (b) present before the introduction of a preventive cause. Participants were asked to evaluate the influence of various candidate causes on an outcome as well as to rate their confidence in those judgments. They were presented with information on the relative frequencies of the outcome given the presence and absence of various candidate causes. These relative frequencies, sample size, and the direction of the causal influence (generative vs. preventive) were manipulated. It was found that both virtual and actual sample size affected confidence. Further, confidence affected estimates of strength, but confidence and strength are dissociable. The results enable a consistent explanation of the puzzling previous finding that observed causal-strength ratings often deviated from the predictions of both of the 2 dominant models of causal strength.
Similar articles
-
Human judgments of positive and negative causal chains.J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2009 Apr;35(2):153-68. doi: 10.1037/a0013764. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2009. PMID: 19364225
-
Accounting for occurrences: a new view of the use of contingency information in causal judgment.J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Jan;34(1):204-18. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.204. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008. PMID: 18194063
-
Analogical and category-based inference: a theoretical integration with Bayesian causal models.J Exp Psychol Gen. 2010 Nov;139(4):702-27. doi: 10.1037/a0020488. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2010. PMID: 21038985
-
Property transmission: an explanatory account of the role of similarity information in causal inference.Psychol Bull. 2009 Sep;135(5):774-93. doi: 10.1037/a0016970. Psychol Bull. 2009. PMID: 19702382 Review.
-
The causal asymmetry.Psychol Rev. 2006 Jan;113(1):132-47. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.113.1.132. Psychol Rev. 2006. PMID: 16478304 Review.
Cited by
-
Individuals Who Believe in the Paranormal Expose Themselves to Biased Information and Develop More Causal Illusions than Nonbelievers in the Laboratory.PLoS One. 2015 Jul 15;10(7):e0131378. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131378. eCollection 2015. PLoS One. 2015. PMID: 26177025 Free PMC article.
-
Adapting to an Uncertain World: Cognitive Capacity and Causal Reasoning with Ambiguous Observations.PLoS One. 2015 Oct 15;10(10):e0140608. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140608. eCollection 2015. PLoS One. 2015. PMID: 26468653 Free PMC article.
-
The more, the merrier: Treatment frequency influences effectiveness perception and further treatment choice.Psychon Bull Rev. 2021 Apr;28(2):665-675. doi: 10.3758/s13423-020-01832-6. Epub 2020 Oct 29. Psychon Bull Rev. 2021. PMID: 33123843
-
Individual differences in strategy use and performance during fault diagnosis.Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2020 Oct 23;5(1):49. doi: 10.1186/s41235-020-00250-5. Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2020. PMID: 33095326 Free PMC article.
-
Two heads are better than one, but how much? Evidence that people's use of causal integration rules does not always conform to normative standards.Exp Psychol. 2014;61(5):356-67. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000255. Exp Psychol. 2014. PMID: 24614872 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources