Article

When do we think that X caused Y?

2019-10-04

Abstract excerpt

<p>When explaining an event, people tend to select a single cause out of the multiple factors that contributed -- for instance, they will say that a forest fire was caused by a lit match, without mentioning the oxygen in the air which helped fuel the fire. Recently scholars have suggested that causal selection is designed to provide explanations that are likely to generalize across a variety of background circumst...

Topics

Open a Topic to create a Post that cites this publication.

Identifiers and source

Literature Corpus work: 11e38232-41d3-513f-b5e4-cca31660e559
DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/gxq23

Open publication

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

When do we think that X caused Y?DOI 10.31234/osf.io/gxq23Read

The interplay between covariation, temporal, and mechanism information in singular causation judgmentsSemantic proximity Read

Productive causation and compositionalitySemantic proximity Read

Looking back to plan ahead: Causal judgments as a sampling approximation for action effectivenessSemantic proximity Read

Looking back to plan ahead: Causal judgments as a sampling approximation for action effectivenessSemantic proximity Read

Rational causal induction from events in timeSemantic proximity Read

Rational causal induction from events in timeSemantic proximity Read

How do people generalize causal relations over objects? A non-parametric Bayesian accountSemantic proximity Read

Instrumental Causal LearningSemantic proximity Read

Building Compressed Causal Models of the WorldSemantic proximity Read

Continuous time causal structure induction with prevention and generationSemantic proximity Read

Overcoming distortion in multidimensional predictive representationSemantic proximity Read

Powering up causal generalization: A model of human conceptual bootstrapping with adaptor grammarsSemantic proximity Read