Ralf Mayrhofer

Indicators of causal agency in physical interactions: The role of the prior context

The question how agent and patient roles are assigned to causal participants has largely been neglected in the psychological literature on force dynamics. Inspired by the linguistic theory of Dowty (1991), we propose that agency attributions are based on a prototype concept of human intervention. We predicted that the number of criteria a participant in a causal interaction shares with this prototype determines the strength of agency intuitions. We showed in two experiments using versions of Michottes (1963) launching scenarios that agency intuitions were moderated by manipulations of the context prior to the launching event. Altering features, such as relative movement, sequence of visibility, and self-propelled motion, tended to increase agency attributions to the participant that is normally viewed as patient in the standard scenario.

Sufficiency and Necessity Assumptions in Causal Structure Induction

Research on human causal induction has shown that people have general prior assumptions about causal strength and about how causes interact with the background. We propose that these prior assumptions about the parameters of causal systems do not only manifest themselves in estimations of causal strength or the selection of causes but also when deciding between alternative causal structures. In three experiments, we requested subjects to choose which of two observable variables was the cause and which the effect. We found strong evidence that learners have interindividually variable but intraindividually stable priors about causal parameters that express a preference for causal determinism (sufficiency or necessity; Experiment 1). These priors predict which structure subjects preferentially select. The priors can be manipulated experimentally (Experiment 2) and appear to be domain-general (Experiment 3). Heuristic strategies of structure induction are suggested that can be viewed as simplified implementations of the priors.

Hierarchical Bayesian models as formal models of causal reasoning

Hierarchical Bayesian models (HBMs) have recently been advocated as formal, computational models of causal induction and reasoning. These models assume that abstract, theoretical causal knowledge and observable data constrain causal model representations of the world. HBMs allow us to model various forms of inferences, including the induction of causal model representations, causal categorisation and the induction of causal laws. It will be shown how HBMs can account for the induction of causal models from limited data by means of abstract causal knowledge. In addition, a Bayesian framework of the induction of causal laws, i.e. causal relations among types of events, will be presented. Respective empirical findings from psychological research with adults and children will be reviewed. Limitations of HBMs will be discussed and it will be shown how simple, heuristic models may describe the cognitive processes underlying causal induction. We will argue that formal computational model like HBMs and cognitive ...

Causal agency and the perception of force.

In the Michotte task, a ball (X) moves toward a resting ball (Y). In the moment of contact, X stops und Y starts moving. Previous studies have shown that subjects tend to view X as the causal agent (“X launches Y”) rather than Y (“Y stops X”). Moreover, X tends to be attributed more force than Y (force asymmetry), which contradicts the laws of Newtonian mechanics. Recent theories of force asymmetry try to explain these findings as the result of an asymmetrical identification with either the (stronger) agent or the (weaker) patient of the causal interaction. We directly tested this assumption by manipulating attributions of causal agency while holding the properties of the causal interaction constant across conditions. In contrast to previous accounts, we found that force judgments stayed invariant across conditions in which assignments of causal agency shifted from X to Y and that even those subjects who chose Y as the causal agent gave invariantly higher force ratings to X. These results suggest that causal agency and the perception of force are conceptually independent of each other. Different possible explanations are discussed.

Time in causal structure learning.

A large body of research has explored how the time between two events affects judgments of causal strength between them. In this article, we extend this work in 4 experiments that explore the role of temporal information in causal structure induction with multiple variables. We distinguish two qualitatively different types of information: The order in which events occur, and the temporal intervals between those events. We focus on one-shot learning in Experiment 1. In Experiment 2, we explore how people integrate evidence from multiple observations of the same causal device. Participants’ judgments are well predicted by a Bayesian model that rules out causal structures that are inconsistent with the observed temporal order, and favors structures that imply similar intervals between causally connected components. In Experiments 3 and 4, we look more closely at participants’ sensitivity to exact event timings. Participants see three events that always occur in the same order, but the variability and correlation between the timings of the events is either more consistent with a chain or a fork structure. We show, for the first time, that even when order cues do not differentiate, people can still make accurate causal structure judgments on the basis of interval variability alone.

Successful Structure Learning from Observational Data

Previous work suggests that humans find it difficult to learn the structure of causal systems given observational data alone. We identify two conditions that enable successful structure learning from observational data: people succeed if the underlying causal system is deterministic, and if each pattern of observations has a single root cause. In four experiments, we show that either condition alone is sufficient to enable high levels of performance, but that performance is poor if neither condition applies. A fifth experiment suggests that neither determinism nor root sparsity takes priority over the other. Our data are broadly consistent with a Bayesian model that embodies a preference for structures that make the observed data not only possible but probable.