A dissociation between causal judgment and outcome recall.

Chris J. Mitchell*, Peter F. Lovibond, Chee York Gan

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

It has been suggested that causal learning in humans is similar to Pavlovian conditioning in animals. According to this view, judgments of cause reflect the degree to which an association exists between the cause and the effect. Inferential accounts, by contrast, suggest that causal judgments are reasoning based rather than associative in nature. We used a direct measure of associative strength, identification of the outcome with which a cause was paired (cued recall), to see whether associative strength translated directly into causal ratings. Causal compounds AB+ and CD+ were intermixed withA+ and C- training. Cued-recall performance was better for cue B than for cue D; thus, associative strength was inherited by cue B from the strongly associated cue A (augmentation). However, the reverse was observed on the causal judgment measure: Cue B was judged to be less causal than D (cue competition). These results support an inferential over an associative account of causal judgments.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)950-954
Number of pages0
JournalPsychon Bull Rev
Volume12
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2005

Keywords

  • Association
  • Decision Making
  • Humans
  • Judgment
  • Mental Recall

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A dissociation between causal judgment and outcome recall.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this