Abstract
This article reports results from two studies of how people answer counterfactual questions about simple machines. Participants learned about devices that have a specific configuration of components, and they answered questions of the form "If component X had not operated [failed], would component Y have operated?" The data from these studies indicate that participants were sensitive to the way in which the antecedent state is described-whether component X "had not operated" or "had failed." Answers also depended on whether the device is deterministic or probabilistic-whether X's causal parents "always" or only "usually" cause X to operate. Participants' explanations of their answers often invoked non-operation of causally prior components or unreliability of prior connections. They less often mentioned independence from these causal elements.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1107-1135 |
Number of pages | 29 |
Journal | Cognitive Science |
Volume | 37 |
Issue number | 6 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Aug 2013 |
Keywords
- Bayes nets
- Counterfactual conditionals
- Explanation
- Reasoning
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
- Artificial Intelligence
- Cognitive Neuroscience